>I think you have a lucky VM/OS - close() on the accepting
>socket doesn't
>stop the accept() thread ( at least not on Linux/JDK1.3 ).
That's right on Linux Redhat 6.2 and glibc 2.1.x and IBM JDK 1.3.
But it seems to work fine on Redhat 7.0 which use a glibc 2.2.
But the fundamental step for
At 12:49 PM -0700 04/24/2001, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Yes, but I can hardly find time for one. I would love to work on both -
>but so far I coulnd't find people to help on the /admin, and I'll
>not start it alone.
>( well, Larry and few others helped a lot - but he seems to have even less
>free
On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Brad Cox wrote:
> >In 3.3 we package all the tests as self-contained wars, and the admin has
> >a web-based runner - but it needs more polishing to make it really easy to
> >use.
>
> That's roughly how I meant for a gui to work. A few text boxes for
> options every novice m
At 9:50 AM -0700 04/24/2001, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>here are few ideas that can be used for configuration validation, and
>the best ( IMHO ) is to run the sanity test after every change in the
>config file. ( maybe watchdog too ).
>
>In 3.3 we package all the tests as self-contained wars, and t
On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Brad Cox wrote:
> At 7:23 AM -0700 04/24/2001, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >Anyway - a cleaner solution ( IMHO ) is to just set "stoped" and do a
> >bogus connection. That's what I did in 3.3 - and seems to work fine.
>
> That does sound better. I really hope this gets nailed
At 7:23 AM -0700 04/24/2001, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Anyway - a cleaner solution ( IMHO ) is to just set "stoped" and do a
>bogus connection. That's what I did in 3.3 - and seems to work fine.
That does sound better. I really hope this gets nailed ASAP. I
suspect the present configuration comp
On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Brad Cox PhD wrote:
> At 7:19 PM -0700 04/23/2001, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >On Mon, 23 Apr 2001, Arun Katkere wrote:
> >In general you need to do something to unblock the accept thread, and 3.2
> >doesn't have this in.
>
> Yes, I remember now. You're absolutely right. You
At 7:19 PM -0700 04/23/2001, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>On Mon, 23 Apr 2001, Arun Katkere wrote:
>In general you need to do something to unblock the accept thread, and 3.2
>doesn't have this in.
Yes, I remember now. You're absolutely right. You need
serverSocket.setSoTimeout() to break the accept
On Mon, 23 Apr 2001, Arun Katkere wrote:
> In my experience (having started/stopped Tomcat engine programatically via
> ContextManager API in a loop 100s of times), server socket is always closed
> correctly. And looking at 3.2.2 beta 3 source code, both PoolTcpEndpoint and
> SimpleTcpEndpoint cl
oya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1418), resolved for 3.3
>(not 3.2.2). There is also some memory leak which I haven't had a chance to
>track down, yet.
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Brad Cox PhD [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>> Sent: Monday, April 23
Fixed for 3.3, I'm not sure it's very easy for 3.2.2.
The threads are waiting in accept, so one solution is to set "stopped" and
make a dummy connection. The problem is that there are few places that
need to be fixed to support stop/start ( another bug was that logger and
session expirer thread
some memory leak which I haven't had a chance to
track down, yet.
> -Original Message-
> From: Brad Cox PhD [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, April 23, 2001 6:04 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: ServerSocket not being closed properly.
>
>
>
At 7:06 PM -0500 04/23/2001, Marc Saegesser wrote:
>I was just about to call the vote for the final release of Tomcat 3.2.2
...
While you're at it, could you ensure that tomcat closes its server
socket instead of relying on the system to do it when the VM exits?
This is a long-standing problem
13 matches
Mail list logo
