On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 11:41 AM, Konstantin Kolinko
wrote:
> 2. If the protocol between HTTPD and Tomcat is AJP,
> then the protocol itself has its own limitation, which is ~15 times
> lesser than that amount.
Thanks for anticipating my next question. Right now we're using
mod_proxy with the HTTP
2012/10/1 Andrew Todd :
> On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 6:21 AM, Konstantin Kolinko
> wrote:
>> In Tomcat each request processor has a byte buffer and all the headers
>> must fit into that buffer.
>
> Thanks so much for the detailed response. I have a couple more questions:
>
> 1) When a request is reje
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Andrew,
On 10/1/12 10:33 AM, Andrew Todd wrote:
> 1) When a request is rejected for being too large, is there any
> logging that happens or can happen in Tomcat?
Looks like you'll get an IllegalArgumentException. Easy enough to test
yourself, eh?
>
On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 6:21 AM, Konstantin Kolinko
wrote:
> In Tomcat each request processor has a byte buffer and all the headers
> must fit into that buffer.
Thanks so much for the detailed response. I have a couple more questions:
1) When a request is rejected for being too large, is there a
2012/9/28 Andrew Todd :
> I have a question about maxHttpHeaderSize [0]. In Apache httpd, there
> are two different parameters that affect the maximum size of an HTTP
> header, limitRequestFieldSize and limitRequestLine. [1] These
> configuration values specify about 8 kilobytes per _line_ in the
>
Done:
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50631
Thanks,
Yuesong
On Jan 21, 2011, at 9:33 AM, Mark Thomas wrote:
> On 21/01/2011 13:55, Yuesong Wang wrote:
>> Just to confirm, it is a bug in the InputBuffer, not OutputBuffer?
>
> InputBuffer, yes.
>
> OutputBuffer not so sure.
So the bug is InternalNioInputBuffer not honoring maxHttpHeaderSize?
Yuesong
On Jan 21, 2011, at 9:33 AM, Mark Thomas wrote:
> On 21/01/2011 13:55, Yuesong Wang wrote:
>> Just to confirm, it is a bug in the InputBuffer, not OutputBuffer?
>
> InputBuffer, yes.
>
> OutputBuffer not so sure. As a
On 21/01/2011 13:55, Yuesong Wang wrote:
> Just to confirm, it is a bug in the InputBuffer, not OutputBuffer?
InputBuffer, yes.
OutputBuffer not so sure. As a minimum, it should be consistent with the
other connectors. I haven't checked how they behave.
Mark
>
> Yuesong
>
> On Jan 21, 2011, a
Just to confirm, it is a bug in the InputBuffer, not OutputBuffer?
Yuesong
On Jan 21, 2011, at 6:12 AM, Mark Thomas wrote:
> On 21/01/2011 00:53, Yuesong Wang wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Is there a reason why InternalNioInputBuffer automatically grows its buffer,
>> effectively ignoring the maxHttpHea
On 21/01/2011 00:53, Yuesong Wang wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is there a reason why InternalNioInputBuffer automatically grows its buffer,
> effectively ignoring the maxHttpHeaderSize setting, while
> InternalNioOutputBuffer doesn't? I was playing around with the setting, and
> set it to a rather small va
> From: Josef Galea [mailto:jos...@ccbilleu.com]
> Subject: maxHttpHeaderSize question
>
> Does the connector attribute maxHttpHeaderSize refer to the
> total size of all the headers, or of each individual header?
The total. BTW, the default is 8192 in Tomcat 6.0.18, not 4096; the doc is out
Rainer,
Thanks for the comprehensive reply. We're using Apache on RHEL4. I'll try
and investigate the actual URL. It is a very busy environment (> 25 million
hits a day) so it'll take me some time to pick through.
Yes it does look like a response. I'm assuming this doesn't just mean it's a
big pa
Hi Rob,
I would prefer to find out, what kind of requests cause this behaviour.
Are there log messages in the mod_jk log file? The mod_jk log file
contains the pid and thread-ID of the web server thread processing the
request. Dependent on the platform an web server, you casn also log the
pid
13 matches
Mail list logo
