RE: Tomcat 3.3 - Cactus Issue

Ok. Thanks Costin. What I'll keep in mind is that it is complex ... ;-) -Vincent > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 08 February 2002 00:28 > To: Tomcat Developers List > Subject: RE: Tomcat 3.3 - Cactus Issue > > O

RE: Tomcat 3.3 - Cactus Issue

On Thu, 7 Feb 2002, Vincent Massol wrote: > Last thing I'd like to confirm : When data is sent over a socket, it > will fill the socket buffer (at the client side) and then sending of > data will block until the server side reads from the socket buffer ? If The first part - I'm not sure. I expec

RE: Tomcat 3.3 - Cactus Issue

ginal Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 07 February 2002 22:47 > To: Tomcat Developers List > Subject: RE: Tomcat 3.3 - Cactus Issue > > On Thu, 7 Feb 2002, Larry Isaacs wrote: > > > Many thanks for finding this. Not suprisingl

RE: Tomcat 3.3 - Cactus Issue

On Thu, 7 Feb 2002, Larry Isaacs wrote: > Many thanks for finding this. Not suprisingly Costin's > initial guess was correct. Fortunately I wasn't wrong > about one assumption, which was the reason for the failure > was that Tomcat 3.3 was too fast. Thanks again, to Costin. Well, given the am

Re: Tomcat 3.3 - Cactus Issue

See inline. - Original Message - From: "Vincent Massol" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Tomcat Developers List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2002 1:57 PM Subject: RE: Tomcat 3.3 - Cactus Issue > Hey thanks guys ! You'

RE: Tomcat 3.3 - Cactus Issue

On Thu, 7 Feb 2002, Vincent Massol wrote: > Are you saying that the logic in Tomcat is that prior to closing a > socket, all data is read first ? No, tomcat will just try to flush it's input buffers. We don't want to read all data - the servlet is supposed to process the request and decide if i

RE: Tomcat 3.3 - Cactus Issue

ht and then tag 3.3.1-beta1 and begin staging the beta1 release. Cheers, Larry > -Original Message- > From: Bill Barker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2002 4:38 PM > To: Tomcat Developers List > Subject: Re: Tomcat 3.3 - Cactus Issue > > >

RE: Tomcat 3.3 - Cactus Issue

HTTP parameters are sent both in the URL _and_ in the body as POST data ? Thanks a lot -Vincent > -Original Message- > From: Bill Barker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 07 February 2002 21:38 > To: Tomcat Developers List > Subject: Re: Tomcat 3.3 - Cactus Issue > >

Re: Tomcat 3.3 - Cactus Issue

ED]> Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2002 9:05 AM Subject: RE: Tomcat 3.3 - Cactus Issue > On Thu, 7 Feb 2002, Vincent Massol wrote: > > > The particularity of testPostMethod is that it sends information both in > > the URL (as parameters) and in the request BODY in POST form

RE: Tomcat 3.3 - Cactus Issue

> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2002 12:06 PM > To: Tomcat Developers List > Subject: RE: Tomcat 3.3 - Cactus Issue > > > On Thu, 7 Feb 2002, Vincent Massol wrote: > > > The p

RE: Tomcat 3.3 - Cactus Issue

On Thu, 7 Feb 2002, Vincent Massol wrote: > The particularity of testPostMethod is that it sends information both in > the URL (as parameters) and in the request BODY in POST form. > > Thus, there is some POST data sent ! Ok, then what really matters is who reads the body and how. Sorry for not

RE: Tomcat 3.3 - Cactus Issue

Line 313: out.print(queryString.toString()); out.close(); -Vincent > -Original Message- > From: Larry Isaacs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 07 February 2002 15:43 > To: Tomcat Developers List > Subject: RE: Tomcat 3.3 - Cactus Issue > > Thanks for the info. However,

RE: Tomcat 3.3 - Cactus Issue

lace I'm not looking where POST data is added as part of the client handling for this test? Cheers, Larry > -Original Message- > From: Vincent Massol [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2002 10:15 AM > To: 'Tomcat Developers List

RE: Tomcat 3.3 - Cactus Issue

> -Original Message- > From: Larry Isaacs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 07 February 2002 14:16 > To: 'Tomcat Developers List' > Subject: RE: Tomcat 3.3 - Cactus Issue > > For the testPostMethod test, can you point me to where in > Cactus, the POST

RE: Tomcat 3.3 - Cactus Issue

age- > From: Vincent Massol [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2002 8:09 AM > To: 'Tomcat Developers List' > Subject: RE: Tomcat 3.3 - Cactus Issue > > > Sorry guys for not jumping in earlier. > > Here is some more informat

RE: Tomcat 3.3 - Cactus Issue

Costin, See inline > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 05 February 2002 19:08 > To: Tomcat Developers List > Subject: Re: Tomcat 3.3 - Cactus Issue > > On Tue, 5 Feb 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Mo

RE: Tomcat 3.3 - Cactus Issue

TECTED]] > Sent: 05 February 2002 19:46 > To: Tomcat Developers List > Subject: RE: Tomcat 3.3 - Cactus Issue > > On Tue, 5 Feb 2002, Larry Isaacs wrote: > > > I looked for this and didn't find that there was any POST data > > sent and none was read. I certainly

RE: Tomcat 3.3 - Cactus Issue

On Tue, 5 Feb 2002, Larry Isaacs wrote: > I tried adding a Thread.sleep(1) just before the call to > TcpConnection.shutdownInput() in Http10Interceptor. > A System.out.println() within shutdownInput's "while" > never prints during a successful Cactus run on Win2k. > Is there anything different I

RE: Tomcat 3.3 - Cactus Issue

riginal Message- From: Larry Isaacs Sent: Tue 2/5/2002 2:56 PM To: 'Tomcat Developers List' Cc: Subject: RE: Tomcat 3.3 - Cactus Issue > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesd

RE: Tomcat 3.3 - Cactus Issue

> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2002 2:46 PM > To: Tomcat Developers List > Subject: RE: Tomcat 3.3 - Cactus Issue > > > On Tue, 5 Feb 2002, Larry Isaacs wrote: > > One question -

RE: Tomcat 3.3 - Cactus Issue

On Tue, 5 Feb 2002, Larry Isaacs wrote: > I looked for this and didn't find that there was any POST data > sent and none was read. I certainly could have missed something. > I don't completely understand everything that Cactus' controller > servlet does on the Tomcat side. However, I think I ch

RE: Tomcat 3.3 - Cactus Issue

Larry, See below. > -Original Message- > From: Larry Isaacs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 05 February 2002 19:03 > To: 'Tomcat Developers List' > Subject: RE: Tomcat 3.3 - Cactus Issue > > Comments below. > [snip] > > > > Let

RE: Tomcat 3.3 - Cactus Issue

> Vincent: is your test servlet reading the body i.e. calls > getParameters() if it's a url-encoded body, or read > the full stream ? > > If not, I believe the current behavior is correct and shouldn't > be changed - it signals the CLIENT that whatever it posted > was not read, and that's a very

Re: Tomcat 3.3 - Cactus Issue

On Tue, 5 Feb 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Most of the time it happens when something is still in the write > buffer ( i.e. unsent or unread ), and the remote side is closing > the connection. I'll try again: Assuming CLIENT sending data to SERVER. The exception happens when: - server has r

RE: Tomcat 3.3 - Cactus Issue

Comments below. > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2002 12:45 PM > To: Tomcat Developers List > Subject: Re: Tomcat 3.3 - Cactus Issue > > > Hi Larry, > > We had a similar problem lon

Re: Tomcat 3.3 - Cactus Issue

Hi Larry, We had a similar problem long time ago - with the POST and the extra CRLF. While investigating it, I found a lot of interesting stuff about "Connection reset by peer" :-) Most of the time it happens when something is still in the write buffer ( i.e. unsent or unread ), and the remote s