Return-Path: <M.Interesse@netsiel.it>
Mailing-List: contact tomcat-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Delivered-To: mailing list tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org
Received: (qmail 34245 invoked from network); 2 Feb 2000 11:39:03 -0000
Received: from menhed.netsiel.it (156.54.254.2)
  by 63.211.145.10 with SMTP; 2 Feb 2000 11:39:03 -0000
Received: from exch_srv.netsiel.it (156.54.2.73 [156.54.2.73]) by
 menhed.netsiel.it with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version
 5.5.2448.0)
	id D2CNXDVS; Wed, 2 Feb 2000 12:39:01 +0100
Received: by EXCH_SRV with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0)
	id <DH8K4G5D>; Wed, 2 Feb 2000 12:38:50 +0100
Message-ID: <1357AA2133AAD21198CE00A0C9E95DD481FC6C@EXCH_SRV>
From: Interesse Michelangelo <M.Interesse@netsiel.it>
To: "'tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org'" <tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Subject: Session already invalidated
Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2000 12:38:44 +0100 
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi folks,

I've just joined the list, so I'm sorry if some of the issues have =
already
been answered.

1) While evaluating Tomcat, I've migrated my own servlets/JSPs from =
version
3.0 to 3.1M1, getting the following error when creating a new Session.
java.lang.IllegalStateException: setAttribute: Session already =
invalidated
	at
org.apache.tomcat.session.StandardSession.setAttribute(StandardSession.j=
ava:
709)
	at NMWeB.doGet(NMWeB.java:184)	<---- my servlet
	at javax.servlet.http.HttpServlet.service(HttpServlet.java:740)
	at javax.servlet.http.HttpServlet.service(HttpServlet.java:865)
	at org.apache.tomcat.core.ServletWrapper.handleInvocation(Compiled
Code)
	at
org.apache.tomcat.core.ServletWrapper.handleRequest(ServletWrapper.java:=
224)
	at
org.apache.tomcat.servlets.InvokerServlet.service(InvokerServlet.java:24=
0)
	at javax.servlet.http.HttpServlet.service(HttpServlet.java:865)
	at org.apache.tomcat.core.ServletWrapper.handleInvocation(Compiled
Code)
	at
org.apache.tomcat.core.ServletWrapper.handleRequest(ServletWrapper.java:=
224)
	at
org.apache.tomcat.core.ContextManager.service(ContextManager.java:347)
	at
org.apache.tomcat.service.http.HttpConnectionHandler.processConnection(H=
ttpC
onnectionHandler.java:144)
	at
org.apache.tomcat.service.TcpConnectionThread.run(TcpEndpoint.java:305)
	at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:466)

What's  strange (not too much !) is that this happen only the first =
time I
call the servlet, but the subsequent calls work fine.=20
With previous version of Tomcat (3.0) I had no problem about that, but
because I'm now planning to integrate the Cocoon framework I need a =
newer
version.

The code I wrote in my servlet is:

		HttpSession sss=3Dreq.getSession(false);
		if(sss!=3Dnull)
			sss.invalidate();

		sss=3Dreq.getSession(true);
	184:	sss.setAttribute("utente","*");

Any fix or workaround about this issue ?

2) When the next version (or milestone) of Tomcat will be available?

Thanks

Michelangelo Interesse
----------------------------
      Process Support Systems
               Netsiel S.p.A.
      * ++39-080-5092.220
----------------------------


> ----------
> Da:	shachor@il.ibm.com[SMTP:shachor@il.ibm.com]
> Risposta a: 	tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org
> Inviato:	mercoled=EC 2 febbraio 2000 11.58
> A:	tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org
> Cc: 	jluc@ma-planete.net
> Oggetto:	Re: Discussion: AJP next
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> >
> > 1 - integrating a JVM in an Apache module is a _bad thing_ (tm) =
IMO.
> >     . from the architecture point of view. (n-tier is better for
> > scalability than monolithic servers)
> >     . from the security point of view (small pieces of code means =
less
> > bugs, user permissions problems)
> >     . from the portability point of view (example: Apache runs very =
well
> > on BSDs. JVMs don't).
> >
>=20
> You are correct, integrating a JVM into apache (or any other web =
server)
> is not
> good. However, on NT there are performance improvements when working
> in-process
> and if you want to create the biggest bang this is the way to go.
>=20
> I agree that a JNI only solution is bad (does not scale/not as stable =
...)
> but
> we should
> try to make it possible.
>=20
> >
> > 4 - sockets cannot be easily shared between httpd processes (on =
Unix at
> > least, and with Apache 1.x).
> >
> Neither on NT.
>=20
> >
> > 5 - Using any other protocol than ajpv11 is faster.
> >     . yes but ajpv11 brings everything needed. So keep the =
"verbose"
> > protocol a possible choice.(for ben-ssl/mod_ssl by example).
> >
> We are not saying that we want to kill ajp12, only that we want to =
add
> something
> new.
>=20
> >
> > 7 - All of this has to pass firewalls (callbacks ?)
> >
> On the same socket.
>=20
>=20
>      Gal Shachor
>=20
> -------------------------------
> Gal Shachor
> IBM Research, Haifa Lab.
> Email: shachor@il.ibm.com
> Notes: Gal Shachor/Haifa/IBM@IBMIL
> Phone: +972-4-8296164
> Fax: +972-4-8550070
> Address: IBM Haifa Research Lab, Matam, Haifa 31905, Israel
>=20
>=20
>=20
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tomcat-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: tomcat-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>=20