The third one. ☹
Oh well, I had to ask.
-Eric
-Original Message-
From: Mark Thomas
Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2025 2:50 AM
To: users@tomcat.apache.org
Subject: Re: State Synchronization without Serialization - Possible?
On 22/04/2025 01:09, Eric Robinson wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> W
Hi all,
We want to implement tomcat clustering, but we cannot because the application
is commercial, and it does not support serializable objects. In short, it does
not work with tomcat's standard clustering technology. Is there any known
reliable way to share session state, cookies, etc., betw
ll)
On 11/10/2024 01:05, Eric Robinson wrote:
> Mark,
>
> Thanks very much for the update. We'll check back in November!
I've just committed the fix. It should be in the next set of releases
(November).
Mark
>
> -Eric
>
>
> -Original Message-
>
,
My apologies. I dropped the ball on this one. I've just re-read the thread to
remind myself of the details. I'm aiming to get this fixed for the November
release round.
Mark
On 10/10/2024 10:10, Eric Robinson wrote:
> Hi Mark,
>
> Just following up on this. Did you
-Original Message-----
From: Eric Robinson
Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2024 11:11 AM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: RE: Database Connection Requests Initiated but Not Sent on the Wire
(Some, Not All)
Hi Mark,
Just following up on this. Did you arrive at the long-term solution? This issue
Hi Mark,
Just following up on this. Did you arrive at the long-term solution? This issue
is still biting us.
-Original Message-
From: Eric Robinson
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2024 4:15 PM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: RE: Database Connection Requests Initiated but Not Sent on the Wire
> What is impact on memory utilization if we increase the acceptCount value?
> There are 100 tomcat instances on the server. And would maxThreads have to
> be increased to accommodate the extra connections?
After reading more, I guess that's a dumb question.
I'm trying to prevent connections from
>
> No - Tomcat passes the acceptCount value to the TCP/IP stack of the OS as
> part of listener socket initialization.
I thought of that after I sent my previous message.
> the OS won't log this, since it's considered to be an application error.
Assuming the problem is the acceptCount value, th
> -Original Message-
> From: Chuck Caldarale
> Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2024 11:01 AM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: Re: Isolating the Root Cause of "Connection Refused"
>
>
> > On Jun 25, 2024, at 12:55, Eric Robinson
> wrote:
> >
> &
> -Original Message-
> From: Chuck Caldarale
> Sent: Monday, June 24, 2024 2:51 PM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: Re: Isolating the Root Cause of "Connection Refused"
>
>
> > On Jun 24, 2024, at 16:40, Eric Robinson
> wrote:
> >
>
ist
> Subject: Re: Isolating the Root Cause of "Connection Refused"
>
>
> > On Jun 24, 2024, at 15:47, Eric Robinson wrote:
> >
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: Chuck Caldarale
> >> Sent: Monday, June 24, 2024 1:40 PM
> >> T
> -Original Message-
> From: Chuck Caldarale
> Sent: Monday, June 24, 2024 1:40 PM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: Re: Isolating the Root Cause of "Connection Refused"
>
>
> > On Jun 24, 2024, at 15:36, Eric Robinson wrote:
> >
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Chuck Caldarale
> Sent: Monday, June 24, 2024 1:29 PM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: Re: Isolating the Root Cause of "Connection Refused"
>
>
> > On Jun 24, 2024, at 15:19, Eric Robinson wrote:
> >
> >
We have a tomcat server that is not that busy. It has 100 tomcat instances
running, but it handles a few hundred connections per second total, across all
of them. It intermittently rejects connection attempts to listening tomcats.
The server is running Rocky 8, has 48 cores (about 15-40% utilize
Chris,
> -Original Message-
> From: Christopher Schultz
> Sent: Friday, May 31, 2024 12:50 PM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Database Connection Requests Initiated but Not Sent on the Wire
> (Some, Not All)
>
> Eric,
>
> On 5/31
wrote:
> > On 31/05/2024 16:09, Eric Robinson wrote:
> >> The results are looking great so far.
> >
> > Excellent.
> >
> >> Here's what we know:
> >>
> >> Before the patch, we had 2 load-balanced tomcats in production for
> >>
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Friday, May 31, 2024 11:45 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Database Connection Requests Initiated but Not Sent on the Wire
> (Some, Not All)
>
> On 31/05/2024 16:09, Eric Robinson wrote:
> > Th
today,
there have been 1 stuck thread on Tomcat A and 6 on Tomcat B.
If the numbers hold, this works out to roughly a 10,000% improvement.
> -Original Message-
> From: Eric Robinson
> Sent: Friday, May 31, 2024 5:54 AM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: RE: Database
d.
>
> Let us know how you get on and good luck.
>
The changes have been applied. We'll know at around 9:30 am EST if they have
had the desired effect. Fingers crossed!
> Mark
>
>
> On 30/05/2024 10:16, Mark Thomas wrote:
> > On 29/05/2024 17:03, Eric Robinson wrot
slava
> next week.
>
> I am expecting that any fix won't be in the June release round but should be
> in
> the July release round.
>
> Let us know how you get on and good luck.
>
Will do!
> Mark
>
>
> On 30/05/2024 10:16, Mark Thomas wrote:
> > On 29
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2024 10:19 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Database Connection Requests Initiated but Not Sent on the Wire
> (Some, Not All)
>
> On 29/05/2024 16:08, Eric Robinson wrote:
>
&g
Hi Mark,
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2024 10:10 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Database Connection Requests Initiated but Not Sent on the Wire
> (Some, Not All)
>
> On 29/05/2024 13:38, Eric Robinson w
Mark,
A few other thoughts come to mind. See below.
> -Original Message-
> From: Eric Robinson
> Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2024 7:39 AM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: RE: Database Connection Requests Initiated but Not Sent on the Wire
> (Some, No
> > On 28/05/2024 16:26, Eric Robinson wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >> Took a bunch of thread and heap dumps during today's painful debacle.
> >> Will send a link to those as soon as I can.
> >
> > Thanks. I have them. I have taken a look and
Hi Mark,
See comments below.
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2024 9:32 AM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: Re: Database Connection Requests Initiated but Not Sent on the Wire
> (Some, Not All)
>
> Hi Eric,
>
> Follow-up observsations and comments in-
questions in-line. I have also read the other
> messages in
> this thread and added a couple of additional questions based on what I read in
> those threads.
>
>
> On 26/05/2024 02:58, Eric Robinson wrote:
> > One of our hosting customers is a medical practice using a commerci
Hi Chuck,
> -Original Message-
> From: Chuck Caldarale
> Sent: Sunday, May 26, 2024 2:21 PM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: Re: Database Connection Requests Initiated but Not Sent on the Wire
> (Some, Not All)
>
>
> > On May 25, 2024, at 20:58, Eric R
t; > -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> > Von: Chuck Caldarale
> > Gesendet: Sonntag, 26. Mai 2024 21:21
> > An: Tomcat Users List
> > Betreff: Re: Database Connection Requests Initiated but Not Sent on
> > the Wire (Some, Not All)
> >
> >
> >
t; > -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> > Von: Eric Robinson
> > Gesendet: Sonntag, 26. Mai 2024 03:59
> > An: users@tomcat.apache.org
> > Betreff: Database Connection Requests Initiated but Not Sent on the
> > Wire (Some, Not All)
> >
> > One of our
One of our hosting customers is a medical practice using a commercial EMR
running on tomcat+mysql. It has operated well for over a year, but users have
suddenly begun experiencing slowness for about an hour at the same time every
day. During the slow times, we've done all the usual troubleshooti
sending a new message to the list.
>
> You also need to provide some version information.
>
> Mark
>
>
> On 06/07/2023 00:36, Eric Robinson wrote:
> > We've been seeing problems with failed requests where the response comes
> back with duplicate chunked encoding
We've been seeing problems with failed requests where the response comes back
with duplicate chunked encoding headers:
[Response]
HTTP/1.1 200
Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=86400; includeSubDomains;
Cache-Control: no-cache,no-store
isAuthenticated: true
X-FRAME-OPTIONS: SAMEORIGIN
Transfer-
to me soon hopefully.
> -Original Message-
> From: Christopher Schultz
> Sent: Monday, January 3, 2022 9:10 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Do I Need Network NameSpaces to Solve This
> Tomcat+Connector/J Problem?
>
> Eric,
>
> On 12/30/21 19:0
Hi Rob,
> > On Dec 30, 2021, at 4:03 PM, Eric Robinson
> wrote:
> >
> > Chris,
> >
> > If I want to ignore the vendor's recommendation and try connection
> pooling anyway, is that something I can enable with a config file setting, or
> do
> the
Chris,
If I want to ignore the vendor's recommendation and try connection pooling
anyway, is that something I can enable with a config file setting, or do they
actually have to trigger it from within their code?
> -Original Message-
> From: Eric Robinson
> Sent: Thursda
> José,
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: José Cornado
> > Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2021 12:00 PM
> > To: Tomcat Users List
> > Subject: Re: Do I Need Network NameSpaces to Solve This
> > Tomcat+Connector/J Problem?
> >
> > But they do not get a corresponding database instance?
> >
>
José,
> -Original Message-
> From: José Cornado
> Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2021 12:00 PM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: Re: Do I Need Network NameSpaces to Solve This
> Tomcat+Connector/J Problem?
>
> But they do not get a corresponding database instance?
>
They do. Each tomcat
Chris,
> Not pooling connections will very likely negatively affect performance.
>
> When you say "they ... have an issue with connection pooling" do you mean
> that they have a technical problem, or do you mean that there is some ill-
> conceived policy against them?
>
> Oh, maybe they are parano
Chris,
> Stupid question: can your database (meaningfully) handle the number of
> connections you are making to it? Let's say you have 5000 connections per
> Tomcat instance to your database, and you want 500 Tomcat instances.
> That means 250 database connections. If every single one of those
Stefan,
> A third option could be to add something between database client and
> server. Something on layer 4 like multiple HAProxy servers or simple NAT
> gateways. Or more complex on layer 7 specfic products like ProxySQL or
> MaxScale. They could even pool connections and reduce the load on the
José,
> Is this setup going to be open to the world or just a big organization? A big
> organization would put a cap on the number of users. Then maybe they
> could divide those between the tomcat instances thus the db server.
>
It's a SaaS solution, where each customer organization gets its own
Mark,
> > My question is, is there a better way?
>
> I can only think of variations on a theme.
>
> The ~64k limit assumes client IP, server IP and server port remain constant.
> i.e. just client port is varying.
>
> That suggests there is a single IP for the database server and that it is
> liste
Hi Simon,
> I guess the database is not on the Tomcat host, otherwise you could connect
> via unix domain socket to avoid the limitations of TCP port numbers.
>
> Otherwise I think you could run a db proxy where your Tomcat clients
> connect locally via unix domain socket and the proxy relays the
> Your problem seems to be in the client-to-db server side of things. Not
> tomcat as a server.
>
In the context of this question, tomcat is the client.
> On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 2:11 PM Eric Robinson
> wrote:
>
> > We want to run a large number of tomcat inst
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Eggers
> Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2021 6:18 PM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Do I Need Network NameSpaces to Solve This
> Tomcat+Connector/J Problem?
>
> Eric:
>
> On 12/29/2021 1:04 PM, Eric Robinson wro
We want to run a large number of tomcat instances on the same server without
virtualization or containerization. Each instance is executed from its own
folder tree and listens on its own unique TCP port. Each instance will run code
that connects to a backend database server to send queries that
> -Original Message-
> From: Berneburg, Cris J. - US
> Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 2021 7:16 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: RE: 500 instances of tomcat on the same server
>
> Eric and Mark
>
> Just curious...
>
> Eric> We can run 75 to 125 instances of tomcat on a single Linux ser
Guido,
I think you intended that message for me, not Brian. Thanks much for the
feedback. I have been reading about Kubernetes, but I got discouraged when I
saw that they dropped Docker support, since Docker seems to be the most popular
containeriziation technology. Also, most of the Kubernetes
t be simple to be able to scale it to different clients like that.
> just my 2 cents.
>
Not simple, but predictable. We've been hosting it for over decade, and we have
a good feel for its resource utilization.
-Eric
> On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 1:12 PM Eric Robinson
> wrote:
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Monday, June 28, 2021 9:04 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: 500 instances of tomcat on the same server
>
> On 28/06/2021 14:53, Christopher Schultz wrote:
> > Eric,
> >
> > On 6/25
> -Original Message-
> From: Christopher Schultz
> Sent: Monday, June 28, 2021 8:54 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: 500 instances of tomcat on the same server
>
> Eric,
>
> On 6/25/21 22:58, Eric Robinson wrote:
> > We can run 75 to 12
> -Original Message-
> From: Shawn Heisey
> Sent: Saturday, June 26, 2021 8:09 PM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: 500 instances of tomcat on the same server
>
> On 6/25/2021 8:58 PM, Eric Robinson wrote:
> > We can run 75 to 125 instances of tomc
We can run 75 to 125 instances of tomcat on a single Linux server with 12 cores
and 128GB RAM. It works great. CPU is around 25%, our JVMs are not throwing
OOMEs, iowait is minimal, and network traffic is about 30Mbps. We're happy with
the results.
Now we're upping the ante. We have a 48-core s
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark H. Wood
> Sent: Friday, June 25, 2021 12:30 PM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Re-Use TCP Source Ports if the Socket is Unique?
>
> On Fri, Jun 25, 2021 at 12:46:03PM +, Eric Robinson wrote:
> > Olaf and Scott -
> -Original Message-
> From: Christopher Schultz
> Sent: Friday, June 25, 2021 11:33 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Re-Use TCP Source Ports if the Socket is Unique?
>
> Eric,
>
> On 6/24/21 21:14, Eric Robinson wrote:
> > I guess I ma
> -Original Message-
> From: Olaf Kock
> Sent: Friday, June 25, 2021 8:07 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Re-Use TCP Source Ports if the Socket is Unique?
>
>
> On 25.06.21 14:46, Eric Robinson wrote:
> > Olaf and Scott --
> >
> &g
me IP that
the connector is configured to listen on.
> -Original Message-
> From: Olaf Kock
> Sent: Friday, June 25, 2021 3:01 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Re-Use TCP Source Ports if the Socket is Unique?
>
>
> On 25.06.21 05:19, Eric Robinson
ce Ports if the Socket is Unique?
>
> Hi Eric,
>
> It should behave the same way. The socket client application will be assigned
> an ephemeral port.
>
> On Fri, Jun 25, 2021 at 9:14 AM Eric Robinson
> wrote:
>
> > I guess I may have answered this question for myself.
connector that
tomcat uses.
> -Original Message-
> From: Eric Robinson
> Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2021 3:19 PM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: Re-Use TCP Source Ports if the Socket is Unique?
>
> Two quick questions.
>
> Question 1:
>
> When tomcat cre
Two quick questions.
Question 1:
When tomcat creates a TCP connection to a remote server (for example, a
back-end database) tomcat is acting as the TCP client in that case. Does it use
the IP it is listening on as the source IP for its outbound client connection?
For example, Server1 has three
> On 3/17/21 15:35, Martin Grigorov wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 17, 2021, 20:27 Eric Robinson
> wrote:
> >
> >>> From: Martin Grigorov
> >>> Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2021 12:45 PM
> >>> To: Tomcat Users List
> >>> Subject: Re: W
> -Original Message-
> From: Martin Grigorov
> Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2021 2:35 PM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: Re: Wait... NULL address in java.net.BindException: Address already
> in use (Bind failed) ???
>
> On Wed, Mar 17, 2021, 20:27 Eric Robinso
> From: Martin Grigorov
> Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2021 12:45 PM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: Re: Wait... NULL address in java.net.BindException: Address already
> in use (Bind failed) ???
>
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Mar 17, 2021, 19:34 Eric Robinson
&
Getting error:
java.net.BindException: Address already in use (Bind failed) :3787
I know how to fix the infamous "Address already in use (Bind failed)" problem
when there is another process already listening on a port. However, I have
confirmed with netstat and fuser that there is no other proc
> -Original Message-
> From: Christopher Schultz
> Sent: Wednesday, December 2, 2020 10:21 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> Mark,
>
> On 11/26/20 05:14, Mark Thomas wrote:
> > On 26/11/2020 04:57, Christopher Schultz wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2020 8:57 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> On 24/11/2020 14:11, Christopher Schultz wrote:
> > On 11/20/20 11:08, Mark Thomas wrote:
>
>
>
> >> A second look at the str
> -Original Message-
> From: Christopher Schultz
> Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2020 8:11 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> Mark,
>
> On 11/20/20 11:08, Mark Thomas wrote:
> > On 20/11/2020 15:43, Eric Robins
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Friday, November 20, 2020 9:32 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> On 20/11/2020 14:55, Eric Robinson wrote:
> >> From: Mark Thomas
> >> It looks like y
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Friday, November 20, 2020 3:17 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> On 19/11/2020 16:03, Mark Thomas wrote:
> > On 19/11/2020 15:55, Eric Robinson wrote:
>
>
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2020 4:34 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> On 18/11/2020 16:28, Mark Thomas wrote:
> > On 18/11/2020 15:41, Eric Robinson wrote:
>
>
>
> >>I tested
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2020 3:03 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> On 13/11/2020 23:46, Mark Thomas wrote:
> > Eric sent me a copy of the strace (thanks Eric) and while it is
> > consistent w
lol, and there I was feeling ignored :-)
> >
> > That was the first thing I would have looked at. Is the OS reporting
> > errors to the JVM writing data or is the JVM not writing the data.
> > Strace will tell you this quite easily.
> >
> >
> > On Fri
> From: Thomas Meyer
> Sent: Friday, November 13, 2020 9:37 AM
> To: Tomcat Users List ; Mark Thomas
> ; users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
>
>
> Am 13. November 2020 10:06:18 MEZ schrieb Mark Thomas
> :
> >On 12/11/2020 14
and
> Kernel.
>
> Paul
Paul, this message went to spam and I just found it!
I will try this suggestion immediately.
-Eric
>
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 12:16 PM Mark Thomas wrote:
>
> > On 16/10/2020 10:05, Eric Robinson wrote:
> > > Hi Mark --
> >
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Friday, November 13, 2020 3:06 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> On 12/11/2020 14:19, Eric Robinson wrote:
> >> From: Mark Thomas
>
>
>
> >>
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2020 4:08 AM
> To: Tomcat Users List ; Eric Robinson
>
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> On 11/11/2020 22:48, Eric Robinson wrote:
> >> -Original Message-
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Monday, November 9, 2020 5:59 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> Eric,
>
> Time to prune the history and provide another summary I think. This
> summary isn't complete. There is more informatio
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Stefan Mayr
> > Sent: Thursday, November 5, 2020 4:24 PM
> > To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
> >
> > Am 03.11.2020 um 16:05 schrieb Eric Robinson:
> > >>
> -Original Message-
> From: Stefan Mayr
> Sent: Thursday, November 5, 2020 4:24 PM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> Am 03.11.2020 um 16:05 schrieb Eric Robinson:
> >> -Original Message-
> >>
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Wednesday, November 4, 2020 11:39 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> On 03/11/2020 15:05, Eric Robinson wrote:
> >> From: Eric Robinson
> >>> From: Mark Thomas
>
>
>
&
> From: Christopher Schultz
> Sent: Tuesday, November 3, 2020 9:26 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> Eric,
>
> On 11/3/20 10:05, Eric Robinson wrote:
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: Eric Robins
> -Original Message-
> From: Eric Robinson
> Sent: Tuesday, November 3, 2020 8:21 AM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: RE: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> > From: Mark Thomas
> > Sent: Tuesday, November 3, 2020 2:06 AM
> > To: Tomcat Users Li
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Tuesday, November 3, 2020 2:06 AM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> On 02/11/2020 12:16, Eric Robinson wrote:
>
>
>
> > Gotcha, thanks for the clarification. Let's see what happens when t
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Monday, November 2, 2020 5:38 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> On 02/11/2020 11:18, Eric Robinson wrote:
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: Mark Thomas
> >> Se
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Sunday, November 1, 2020 11:50 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> On 01/11/2020 16:25, Mark Thomas wrote:
> >
> >
> > Keeping the previous logs for reference:
> >
> >>> Source Time
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2020 5:45 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> On 28/10/2020 20:32, Mark Thomas wrote:
>
>
>
> > I have the off-list mail and will start looking at the logs shortly.
>
> Pr
> From: Eric Robinson
> Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2020 11:33 PM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: RE: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> > From: Mark Thomas
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2020 12:06 PM
> > To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: We
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2020 12:06 PM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> On 27/10/2020 16:29, Eric Robinson wrote:
> >> On 27/10/2020 15:22, Eric Robinson wrote:
>
>
>
> >>> I
> On 27/10/2020 15:22, Eric Robinson wrote:
> >> On 27/10/2020 09:16, Mark Thomas wrote:
> >>> On 27/10/2020 04:43, Eric Robinson wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>>>> Any changes in the Nginx configuration in t
> On 27/10/2020 09:16, Mark Thomas wrote:
> > On 27/10/2020 04:43, Eric Robinson wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >>>>>> Any changes in the Nginx configuration in the relevant timescale?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> -Original Message-
> From: Eric Robinson
> Sent: Monday, October 26, 2020 11:37 PM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: RE: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> > > On 26/10/2020 10:26, Mark Thomas wrote:
> > > > O
> > On 26/10/2020 10:26, Mark Thomas wrote:
> > > On 24/10/2020 01:32, Eric Robinson wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >>>> -Original Message-
> > >>>> From: Mark Thomas
> > >
> > >
> > >
> On 26/10/2020 10:26, Mark Thomas wrote:
> > On 24/10/2020 01:32, Eric Robinson wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >>>> -Original Message-
> >>>> From: Mark Thomas
> >
> >
> >
> >>>> The failed request:
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Eric Robinson
> Sent: Friday, October 23, 2020 7:09 PM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: RE: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> Hi Mark --
>
> Thanks tons for digging into this. See my answers below.
>
> > -Origina
Hi Mark --
Thanks tons for digging into this. See my answers below.
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Friday, October 23, 2020 5:09 PM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> Hi Eric (and those following along),
>
> Eric sent me some
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Friday, October 16, 2020 8:02 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> On 16/10/2020 12:37, Eric Robinson wrote:
> >> From: Mark Thomas
>
>
>
> >> I
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Friday, October 16, 2020 5:17 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> On 16/10/2020 10:05, Eric Robinson wrote:
> > Hi Mark --
> >
> > Those
> > 6. What timeouts are configured for the Connector?
> >
>
> Sorry, which connector are you referring to?
>
Sorry, I'm a dummy. Obviously you mean the tomcat connector.
connectionTimeout="2"
-Eric
Disclaimer : This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended sole
Hi Mark --
Those are great questions. See answers below.
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Thomas
> Sent: Friday, October 16, 2020 2:20 AM
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Weirdest Tomcat Behavior Ever?
>
> On 16/10/2020 00:27, Eric Robinson
Has anyone ever seen a situation where tomcat occasionally fails to send
responses but still logs them?
On a CentOS 7.5 server running in Azure with tomcat 7.0.76 with java 1.0.0_221,
everything runs fine 99.99% of the time, but that last hundredth of a percent
is a bitch. However, intermittent
1 - 100 of 135 matches
Mail list logo
