tomcat-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Paul Frieden <>
Subject Re: No revolution today
Date Fri, 10 Nov 2000 00:02:54 GMT
In our situation, we plan to use multiple virtual hosts, each with its
own root context.  That makes the URLs shorter and easier for people to
work with.  It also lets you more easily move/copy one context to
another without having to fix all the links.

I've posted patches that make this work for us in the past, along with
several other patches for cookie behavior.  We're not running this in
production yet, but I've had load balancing working as expected (as far
as I can tell) with mod_jk and tomcat_32.  I don't have the load
balancing hardware available for testing, but I've set up DNS round
robin, as well as things like killing apache on one host to force it to
the other and the sessions being routed properly.

If anybody is interested in the patches, let me know and I'll post them
to the list again.  One fixed root context load balancing (at least for
us), cookie deletion, session cookie selection, and one that prevents
session cookies other than the valid one from being leaked into a

I'd also like to cast my vote for a production quality release and
continued development of tomcat 3.x for production use.  Tomcat 4.0 may
be elegant, but what I need right now is robust and fast Servlet 2.2/JSP

Paul Frieden

Joseph Chiu wrote:
> Matthew,
> In my environment, I wanted to force all contexts to be in the root context.
> So, my point is -- if you only need the root context (one context only!), my
> kludge works.  If you want root context and non-root contexts to both
> coexist, then you'll need to modify my kludge to NOT force the context to
> the root context.  You'll have to test it to see if it works for you
> (because I haven't). I think Andrew Cowie did the latter (not force the
> contexts to the root context), but I don't want to speak for him.
> If you need multiple contexts without the root context, then the existing
> Tomcat should be perfectly fine.
> Joseph
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matthew Dornquast []
> Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2000 2:28 PM
> To:
> Subject: Re: No revolution today
> > Well, but if you don't need the root-context, then the load balancing
> > *should* work with other contexts.  You are using mod_jserv with APJ
> > Balancesets, right?
> Right Jospeh!
> So how important is it to support load balancing of root contexts?
> How many users use the root context?
> >From where I sit, it's a requirement, I have no other option.
> I don't want to go into the reasons as to why this is, (Unless there is a
> great deal of interest)
> but I do wonder how many others are doing it like I am?
> > its a big change. fix for 3.3 ? This would seriously nuke loadbalancing
> > for 3.2 if something was screwed up. besides, i'd rather see 3.2 stable
> > out after so many months (years?).
> I wish I knew if it was a big change or not.
> When I was trying to do it, it felt like it was more of a mod_jserv issue
> and had little/nothing to do with tomcat.
> It seemed like mod_serv config parser just couldn't grok what I was telling
> it.
> (Kudos to the designer(s) of the API for mod_jserv, I thought it well
> thought out and
> easy to config given the amount of power/flexibility they were giving me.)
> 3.2 Stable is very important, at a minimum however, documentation should be
> updated to state it's not supported in 3.2 root context.
> -matthew
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message