tomcat-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jess Holle <>
Subject Re: Proposed mod_jk logging patch
Date Mon, 11 May 2009 18:36:40 GMT
Rainer Jung wrote:
> I find it hard to decide between your case (we know the nodes are not
> available and we don't need a reminder every minute, instead we want to
> see the "real" errors), and the most common case (we didn't see the
> single initial message a few days ago and so we didn't realize our nodes
> were partially down for a long time).
> So let me first ask: why don't you "stop" the nodes, you know are out of
> service? If you let the balancer know, what your admins know about the
> state of the system, the balancer will no longer throw errors.
This really in some respects a mod_cluster sort of thing.  I have a bank 
of ports in which a smaller number of server processes (embedding 
Tomcat) will be dynamically started.  These will continue to reside on 
these ports unless/until they hang or die -- at which point a 
daemon/manager process will start other server processes in the port 
range -- on whatever ports they can successfully bind to.

Having the daemon/manager process message to mod_jk as to which ports to 
start/stop all the time seems like an undesirable complexity and tight 
coupling.  Ideally the servers shouldn't even know which Apache(s) are 
targeting them, which module is being used, mod_jk or 
mod_proxy_balancer/ajp (or possibly mod_cluster at some point), etc.

Perhaps there should be a configurable boolean as to whether this should 
be logged noisily or quietly to meet both use cases?  [Note I need IIS 
and SJWS support as well as Apache 2.2 and so will need to rely on the 
jk/tc connectors in these cases in any case and will need to be able to 
configure any such setting in all cases.]

Jess Holle

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message