Philip Wigg,
Sorry that was mistake. I didn't clear it :D
problem already solved. Have a nice day dude.
Best regards,
Tseveen.
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 7:51 PM, Philip Wigg wrote:
> > I got prefork.c. Can you drive me
>
> I'm afraid I can't drive you, you'll have to read the documentation
> abo
Hi Jeff,
Many thanks. I am load testing a system with Apache & Weblogic plugin and am
curious about the message. The admins have the issue in hand and may have
implemented the fix you suggested below. If the fix does not work then we will
open a ticket with Oracle.
Again thanks for the help.
-
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 5:33 PM, Tony Anecito wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Has anyone ever seen this error before while using Apache on Solaris say in
> the last year? If so what was the fix?
>
> Deadlock situation detected/avoided: ap_proxy: couldn't create the lock
Isn't that message from the WebLogic
Hi All,
Has anyone ever seen this error before while using Apache on Solaris say in the
last year? If so what was the fix?
Deadlock situation detected/avoided: ap_proxy: couldn't create the lock
Thanks,
-Tony
-
The of
Dan Schaefer wrote:
Does it help to mention that my example.com and www.example.com
certificates are the exact same cert? My apologies for not mentioning
this in the beginning. If and when we do add SSL to other subdomains,
they will be different certs. I *don't* see that happening in the near
>
> http://markmail.org/message/yr52ptnpgbocgvad
>
> But we should just push for SNI, I guess.
> -peter
Yea I agree.
-r
-
The official User-To-User support forum of the Apache HTTP Server Project.
See http://httpd.apache.org/use
* Roger [2009-12-14 17:47]:
> The situation that I was talking about is that if someone access
> http://example.com or http://www.example.com
> then redirect to either https://www.example.com OR https://example.com.
Sure.
> But of course, you cannot stop someone for trying to access
> https://ww
> If both vhosts are accessed via https you'll need both covered, as the
> ssl connection happens before the redirect (as has been pointed out
> dozens of times in recent weeks),
> -peter
>
The situation that I was talking about is that if someone access
http://example.com or http://www.example.co
Peter Schober wrote:
* Roger [2009-12-14 17:26]:
Is the content under example.com and www.example.com the same?
If it is, then just redirect all requests to example.com, www.example.com to one
location. You don't need two certificates. In my opinion, if it is the same
content then having mul
* Roger [2009-12-14 17:26]:
> Is the content under example.com and www.example.com the same?
> If it is, then just redirect all requests to example.com, www.example.com to
> one
> location. You don't need two certificates. In my opinion, if it is the same
> content then having multiple certificat
Roger wrote:
Does it help to mention that my example.com and www.example.com certificates
are the exact same cert? My apologies for not mentioning this in the
beginning. If and when we do add SSL to other subdomains, they will be
different certs. I don't see that happening in the near future, how
>
> Does it help to mention that my example.com and www.example.com certificates
> are the exact same cert? My apologies for not mentioning this in the
> beginning. If and when we do add SSL to other subdomains, they will be
> different certs. I don't see that happening in the near future, however.
Justin Pasher wrote:
Dan Schaefer wrote:
So are you suggesting that I need multiple public IPs to implement
this, or just multiple private IPs? Private IPs is not a problem,
however, due to the fact that we have limited public IPS in our
range, it could be a problem when if and when we add new
thomas2004 wrote:
I have 2 questiuons.
I'll just give my opinion on the first one.
1.
I see many examples as follow:
[code]
worker.list=worker1,worker2
# Set properties for worker1
worker.worker1.type=ajp13
worker.worker1.host=localhost
worker.worker1.port=8009
# Set properties for worker2
w
Dan Schaefer wrote:
So are you suggesting that I need multiple public IPs to implement
this, or just multiple private IPs? Private IPs is not a problem,
however, due to the fact that we have limited public IPS in our range,
it could be a problem when if and when we add new SSL certs. We would
Justin Pasher wrote:
Serge Fonville wrote:
Hi,
My company is wanting to keep this configuration for port 80 and
add an
SSL certificate for just the www.example.com and example.com
hostnames. Is
it possible to have Virtualhosts for just the 443 port and still allow
*.example.com to react th
Serge Fonville wrote:
Hi,
My company is wanting to keep this configuration for port 80 and add an
SSL certificate for just the www.example.com and example.com hostnames. Is
it possible to have Virtualhosts for just the 443 port and still allow
*.example.com to react the same way it does now?
Here is the situation:
I have a php login page at https://login.mydomain.com and an internal
server listening only on localhost http://localhost:12345
I want mod_proxy to send to the internal server only if auth was
successful from the php login page. The user/pass can be in the .php
file itself
Hi everyone, this is my first message to the mailing list
I have a problem with the rewriterules. My English is not the best but I
will explain fine
We have a Plone site on a server listen on 8080 port and apache listen
on 80 and 443 (on the same server) (by default plone doesn't support
> I got prefork.c. Can you drive me
I'm afraid I can't drive you, you'll have to read the documentation
about the process models. Here's a good start:-
http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.2/mpm.html
http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.2/mod/prefork.html
It might be that switching to the worker MPM is what
Philip Wigg,
You're right. Thank you very much. Solved
Regards,
Tseveen.
I got prefork.c. Can you drive me
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 6:23 PM, Philip Wigg wrote:
> > On the documentation of Apache2.2
> > ServerLimit is a hard limit on the number of active child processes, and
> > must be greater
> On the documentation of Apache2.2
> ServerLimit is a hard limit on the number of active child processes, and
> must be greater than or equal to the MaxClients directive divided by
> the ThreadsPerChild directive. ThreadLimit is a hard limit of the number of
> server threads, and must be greater t
Hello,
On the documentation of Apache2.2
ServerLimit <../mod/mpm_common.html#serverlimit>is a hard limit on the
number of active child processes, and must be greater than or equal to the
MaxClients <../mod/mpm_common.html#maxclients> directive divided by the
ThreadsPerChild <../mod/mpm_common.ht
I have 2 questiuons.
1.
I see many examples as follow:
[code]
worker.list=worker1,worker2
# Set properties for worker1
worker.worker1.type=ajp13
worker.worker1.host=localhost
worker.worker1.port=8009
# Set properties for worker2
worker.worker2.type=ajp13
worker.worker2.host=localhost
worker.worke
Hi,
>> My company is wanting to keep this configuration for port 80 and add an
>> SSL certificate for just the www.example.com and example.com hostnames. Is
>> it possible to have Virtualhosts for just the 443 port and still allow
>> *.example.com to react the same way it does now?
>
> Yes, it is.
25 matches
Mail list logo
