Edgar, Reinhard and Rainer and Tim, I forgot to set jvmRoute in my server.xml ;)
But seriously .. many many thanks for your time. I have set the domain property for each worker, and matched them to jvmRoute on the Engine element. This has resolved the issue where Tomcat 1 generates new session ids per request when Tomcat 2 is also running. For example, Tomcat 1 now generates session Ids like this 3A65ADAA09137DB460CB3FD8D393BF20.jvm1 I've been able to get requests into Tomcat 1 that stick with Tomcat 1 perfectly alright which is an improvement. _However_ :) requests that get to Tomcat 2 still do not have session ids returned in the headers at all. I appreciate this is Tomcat that is not generating the session id, but I replicated Tomcat 2 from Tomcat 1, changing server.xml's ports to be unique and I don't see another reason (relative to my knowledge of course) why Tomcat 2 would continue to be blank for Tomcat 2. We are on an intranet, so we use cookies exclusively. Best regards, Allistair == tomcat 1 server.xml Engine == <Engine name="Catalina" defaultHost="localhost" jvmRoute="jvm1"> == tomcat 2 server.xml Engine == <Engine name="Catalina" defaultHost="localhost" jvmRoute="jvm2"> == latest workers config == worker.list=loadbalancer worker.tomcat1.domain=jvm1 worker.tomcat1.port=8009 worker.tomcat1.host=localhost worker.tomcat1.type=ajp13 worker.tomcat1.lbfactor=1 worker.tomcat1.cachesize=10 worker.tomcat2.domain=jvm2 worker.tomcat2.port=8109 worker.tomcat2.host=localhost worker.tomcat2.type=ajp13 worker.tomcat2.lbfactor=1 worker.tomcat2.cachesize=10 worker.loadbalancer.type=lb worker.loadbalancer.balance_workers=tomcat1,tomcat2 worker.loadbalancer.sticky_session=1 -----Original Message----- From: Edgar Alves [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 18 April 2006 14:36 To: Tomcat Users List Subject: Re: JK Sticky Session Handling with Load Balancing Hi again, When using two workers like that you must set the domain property for each of them for having mod_jk send the requests to the appropriate Tomcat instance. Add the following two lines to your workers properties file: worker.tomcat1.domain=tomcat1 worker.tomcat2.domain=tomcat2 And for each Tomcat instance, set the "jvmRoute" attribute of the Engine element in the respective server.xml configuration to the value that you used in the respective worker "domain" property above for each instance ("tomcat1" and "tomcat2" above). -- Edgar Alves Allistair Crossley wrote: > Hi Edgar, > > Yep I just noticed that too :)) However, correcting this configuration > (to the below) does nothing to resolve the issue, because the lb > worker type by default has sticky_session=1. I set it explicitly > anyway as below. > > However, I have noticed that in fact Tomcat 2 is not returning > JSESSIONID headers as Tomcat 1 does when both Tomcats are in. > > To recap then, when only Tomcat 1 is in the loop, JSESSIONIDs are > returned and remains consistent across requests. When Tomcat 2 is > brought in, Tomcat 1 starts generating a different JSESSIONID per > request, whilst Tomcat 2 returns no JSESSIONID at all. > > Thanks, Allistair > > === new config === > > worker.list=loadbalancer > > worker.tomcat1.port=8009 > worker.tomcat1.host=localhost > worker.tomcat1.type=ajp13 > worker.tomcat1.lbfactor=1 > worker.tomcat1.cachesize=10 > > worker.tomcat2.port=8109 > worker.tomcat2.host=localhost > worker.tomcat2.type=ajp13 > worker.tomcat2.lbfactor=1 > worker.tomcat2.cachesize=10 > > worker.loadbalancer.type=lb > worker.loadbalancer.balance_workers=tomcat1,tomcat2 > worker.loadbalancer.sticky_session=1 > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Edgar Alves [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 18 April 2006 12:32 > To: Tomcat Users List > Subject: Re: JK Sticky Session Handling with Load Balancing > > Hi there, > You're setting the sticky_session property for each worker. That's > not how it works. > That property is valid only for the loadbalancer and it takes a > boolean value. Set it to 'True' or '1' to get the desired effect. > Read http://tomcat.apache.org/connectors-doc/config/workers.html for > more info. > > -- Edgar Alves > > Allistair Crossley wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I have setup 2 Tomcats on the same machine fronted by IIS, and used a >> sticky_session=1 JK (1.2.15) load-balanced setup (as printed at the >> foot of this email) >> >> I setup a JSP on both Tomcats that outputs the session ID. >> >> With only 1 Tomcat started, making requests to the JSP results in the >> same session ID being output on each request. >> >> When I start up the 2nd Tomcat and continue making requests to the >> JSP, I am switched between both Tomcats rather than staying on the >> same Tomcat and therefore acquire a new session ID. >> >> However, with the 2 Tomcat's "in the loop" the session Ids become >> different *per request* no matter which Tomcat is used. >> >> I would have expected at most 2 unique session Ids (one per Tomcat) >> since with 1 Tomcat running only, the 1 unique session ID is >> > maintained. > >> I would appreciate any help or guidance as to why this may be >> > happening. > >> Cookies are enabled, and jsessionid is not being used on URLs. >> >> Cheers, Allistair. >> >> == config == >> >> worker.list=loadbalancer >> >> worker.tomcat1.port=8009 >> worker.tomcat1.host=localhost >> worker.tomcat1.type=ajp13 >> worker.tomcat1.lbfactor=1 >> worker.tomcat1.cachesize=10 >> worker.tomcat1.sticky_session=1 >> >> worker.tomcat2.port=8109 >> worker.tomcat2.host=localhost >> worker.tomcat2.type=ajp13 >> worker.tomcat2.lbfactor=1 >> worker.tomcat2.cachesize=10 >> worker.tomcat1.sticky_session=2 >> >> worker.loadbalancer.type=lb >> worker.loadbalancer.balance_workers=tomcat1,tomcat2 >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <FONT SIZE=1 FACE="VERDANA,ARIAL" COLOR=BLUE> ------------------------------------------------------- QAS Ltd. Registered in England: No 2582055 Registered in Australia: No 082 851 474 ------------------------------------------------------- </FONT> <FONT SIZE=1 FACE="VERDANA,ARIAL" COLOR=BLACK> Disclaimer: The information contained within this e-mail is confidential and may be privileged. This email is intended solely for the named recipient only; if you are not authorised you must not disclose, copy, distribute, or retain this message or any part of it. If you have received this message in error please contact the sender at once so that we may take the appropriate action and avoid troubling you further. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender. QAS Limited has the right lawfully to record, monitor and inspect messages between its employees and any third party. Your messages shall be subject to such lawful supervision as QAS Limited deems to be necessary in order to protect its information, its interests and its reputation. Whilst all efforts are made to safeguard Inbound and Outbound emails, QAS Limited cannot guarantee that attachments are virus free or compatible with your systems and does not accept any liability in respect of viruses or computer problems experienced. </FONT> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
