tomcat-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mladen Turk <mladen.t...@jboss.com>
Subject Re: mod_jk replacement?
Date Tue, 23 Jan 2007 07:13:42 GMT
JNeuhoff wrote:
> Thank for your explanations.
> 
>>
>> If any part closes this (AJP) connection you will observe
>> 'memory leaak', meaning thread will stay open without the
>> clue the other part closed the connection.
> 
> Maybe I mis-understood the meaning of the timeout settings because I always
> thought that these would genuinely release the underlying TCP connections
> (except for the connection_pool_minsize number of TCP connections). 
>

Whenever you have connection pool setup
in mod_jk it means you don't have constant connections
any more. The connection pool will maintain the
connections and close them by some rule (size).
Now, having that you *must* have connectionTimeout="60000"
in server.xml for the AJP connector so Tomcat can close
his part of the connection as well.
In any other case Tomcat connection will stay forever
blocked in read() (Just look at the thread dump).
The next request will allocate a new thread untill 200
is reached and consequtive requests will be rejected.

Also, when you have connectionTimeout set you will
need connect_timeout and prepost_timeout set which
you have already so mod_jk can deal more effectively
with sockets closed by Tomcat not depending on the OS
socket timeouts.

Next, your value for connection_pool_timeout is too low
for any practical usage thought.

Regards,
Mladen.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To start a new topic, e-mail: users@tomcat.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tomcat.apache.org


Mime
View raw message