You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@geronimo.apache.org by "Joe Bohn (JIRA)" <de...@geronimo.apache.org> on 2005/09/29 02:50:47 UTC
[jira] Created: (GERONIMO-1029) tomcat web log seems to be created with wrong name and isn't found by the web log viewer portlet
tomcat web log seems to be created with wrong name and isn't found by the web log viewer portlet
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Key: GERONIMO-1029
URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1029
Project: Geronimo
Type: Bug
Components: management, Tomcat
Versions: 1.0-M5
Environment: all
Reporter: Joe Bohn
It seems that the log file for the tomcat web container is being created with an invalid date in the name.
ex. ...geronimo\modules\assembly\target\geronimo-1.0-SNAPSHOT\var\catalina\logs\0.0.0.0_access_log.2005-09-28.txt
Possibly related (or possibly not) is that the management API cannot find matches when performing a search.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see:
http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
Re: [jira] Commented: (GERONIMO-1029) tomcat web log seems to be
created with wrong name and isn't found by the web log viewer portlet
Posted by Joe Bohn <jo...@earthlink.net>.
Yup .... I agree that if we continue to support multiple web managers
then we need to enhance/extend the console for this. However, the
multiple containers was a fairly recent addition and the console hasn't
been updated to reflect this (plus I'm not sure if that decision is
final yet).
I think it's questionable if we should ever extend the console to
support multiple web managers even if we continue to support this in G.
- most customers will not run a configuration with multiple web managers
(IMO probably none).
- Reflecting a multiple web manager structure in the console will
complicate the user interface and confuse most of our customers
(assuming I'm correct on the first point above). BTW, I'm still
convinced that if we go down the multiple web manager path we're not
just talking tomcat, jetty, or both ... but rather N number of web
managers (after all, GBeans can certainly support it).
Is it true the unmodified image that the current image that is built for
G still includes both containers? If so, I would assume that most users
would pick it up and initially experiment with it without change. In
that scenario I think it would be best if the console functioned as
expected. So it appears that we either need to:
1) tweak the console for the "most important" web manager (the one it is
running in).
2) enhance the console to support multiple web managers
3) change the default configuration for G to include just one web manager.
4) Permit the ability to run the same application concurrently in any
number of web managers with all references to the manager presumed to be
the "local" manager (ie. the container in which this is application is
executing). This would enable applications such as the console to return
the expected behavior. To do this right I think we would also have to
update the deploy capability to easily be able to deploy an application
to any one of the installed containers and provide some level of
isolation between the applications deployed in different containers so
that a user could update Appl A on container 1 without affecting Appl A
on container 2.
Since #3 is still controversial it think that eliminates it and #2 from
the choices (for the reasons stated earlier). #1 and #4 are somewhat
related. If we tweak an application like the console to reference only
the local container and deploy it to multiple containers then each
instance of the appl could function independently.
So I will continue to look at a solution for #1 until we reach a final
decision on the "out of the box" G image with regard to the number of
concurrent web managers that are pre-configured.
Joe
David Jencks wrote:
> There should now be "tomcat only" and "jetty only" sets of config files
> in var/config. Does it work properly if you copy config.tomcat.* to
> config.*? I would suggest that if you want to support the "both"
> configuration you need to display all the WebManagers that are returned
> rather than trying to guess which is "more important"
>
> thanks
> david jencks
>
> On Sep 29, 2005, at 8:20 AM, Joe Bohn wrote:
>
>> It turns out this isn't a problem with tomcat, the web log viewer
>> portlet, or even really the management interface. However, it is a
>> bit related to running multiple containers concurrently.
>>
>> The problem is that when we query the kernel get the WebManagerNames
>> from within the portlet(s) we get back an array of 2 (tomcat and
>> jetty). In several places in the console we assume that the
>> container that we need to reference to provide appropriate
>> management information (ie. the container in which the console is
>> currently running) will always be the first entry in the array. Bad
>> assumption. In my case the console is running in the tomcat
>> container but we're attempting to manage the jetty container.
>>
>> So now I just have to come up with a way to detect which WebManager
>> is the one for the "default" container.
>>
>> Joe
>>
>>
>> Joe Bohn wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks for the information Jeff. Right now I'd just like to get it
>>> working with the current log name tomcat. Sometime after that I'll
>>> try to look into supporting various naming formats, multiple log
>>> files, etc...
>>> I think something really strange is going on with my system (or
>>> perhaps the G image itself) regarding the management interface. I
>>> build G with tomcat as the default by running maven -o tomcat from
>>> G\modules\assembly.
>>> This seems to work because when I start the server I see that tomcat
>>> is using port 8080.
>>> 8009 0.0.0.0 Tomcat Connector AJP
>>> 8080 0.0.0.0 Tomcat Connector HTTP
>>> 8090 0.0.0.0 Jetty Connector HTTP
>>> However, then I try to interact with the management implementation
>>> the JettyLogManagerImpl is what is being invoked rather than the
>>> TomcatLogManagerImpl.
>>> Am I doing something wrong when trying to configure for tomcat as
>>> the default? I'll keep looking ....
>>> Joe
>>> Jeff Genender wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yes...the 0.0.0.0 is from line 208 of the j2ee-tomcat-plan.xml,
>>>> which uses the PlanServerHostname from maven.xml (which happens to
>>>> be 0.0.0.0):
>>>>
>>>> prefix=${PlanServerHostname}_access_log.
>>>>
>>>> We can change this via configuration. However, keep in mind this
>>>> can change since its configurable. Especially when using virtual
>>>> hosts, people like to have multiple log files...so they may have
>>>> one that says 0.0.0.0_access_log, and one that says foo_access_log,
>>>> etc.
>>>>
>>>> IMHO, I don't like the "0.0.0.0" in the access_log name. I prefer
>>>> "localhost".
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for looking into this, Joe.
>>>>
>>>> Jeff
>>>>
>>>> Joe Bohn (JIRA) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> [ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1029?
>>>>> page=comments#action_12330793 ]
>>>>> Joe Bohn commented on GERONIMO-1029:
>>>>> ------------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> I created the jira because there are never any records displayed
>>>>> in the web access log viewer when G is configured using tomcat. I
>>>>> created it against both tomcat and management because I was not
>>>>> sure where the problem existed. I thought tomcat might have a
>>>>> problem because I expected the 0.0.0.0 to be the date in the file
>>>>> name. However, based upon Jeff'scomments the problem may be in
>>>>> the management implementation. I'll take a look.
>>>>>
>>>>> Btw, I did not yet create the jira for multiple log file processing.
>>>>>
>>>>>> tomcat web log seems to be created with wrong name and isn't
>>>>>> found by the web log viewer portlet
>>>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> -----------------------------
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Key: GERONIMO-1029
>>>>>> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1029
>>>>>> Project: Geronimo
>>>>>> Type: Bug
>>>>>> Components: management, Tomcat
>>>>>> Versions: 1.0-M5
>>>>>> Environment: all
>>>>>> Reporter: Joe Bohn
>>>>>> Assignee: Jeff Genender
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> It seems that the log file for the tomcat web container is being
>>>>>> created with an invalid date in the name. ex.
>>>>>> ...geronimo\modules\assembly\target\geronimo-1.0-
>>>>>> SNAPSHOT\var\catalina\logs\0.0.0.0_access_log.2005-09-28.txt
>>>>>> Possibly related (or possibly not) is that the management API
>>>>>> cannot find matches when performing a search.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>> --
>> Joe Bohn
>> joe.bohn@earthlink.net
>>
>> "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep, to gain what he cannot
>> lose." -- Jim Elliot
>>
>
>
>
--
Joe Bohn
joe.bohn@earthlink.net
"He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep, to gain what he cannot
lose." -- Jim Elliot
Re: [jira] Commented: (GERONIMO-1029) tomcat web log seems to be created with wrong name and isn't found by the web log viewer portlet
Posted by David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>.
There should now be "tomcat only" and "jetty only" sets of config files
in var/config. Does it work properly if you copy config.tomcat.* to
config.*? I would suggest that if you want to support the "both"
configuration you need to display all the WebManagers that are returned
rather than trying to guess which is "more important"
thanks
david jencks
On Sep 29, 2005, at 8:20 AM, Joe Bohn wrote:
> It turns out this isn't a problem with tomcat, the web log viewer
> portlet, or even really the management interface. However, it is a
> bit related to running multiple containers concurrently.
>
> The problem is that when we query the kernel get the WebManagerNames
> from within the portlet(s) we get back an array of 2 (tomcat and
> jetty). In several places in the console we assume that the container
> that we need to reference to provide appropriate management
> information (ie. the container in which the console is currently
> running) will always be the first entry in the array. Bad assumption.
> In my case the console is running in the tomcat container but we're
> attempting to manage the jetty container.
>
> So now I just have to come up with a way to detect which WebManager is
> the one for the "default" container.
>
> Joe
>
>
> Joe Bohn wrote:
>> Thanks for the information Jeff. Right now I'd just like to get it
>> working with the current log name tomcat. Sometime after that I'll
>> try to look into supporting various naming formats, multiple log
>> files, etc...
>> I think something really strange is going on with my system (or
>> perhaps the G image itself) regarding the management interface. I
>> build G with tomcat as the default by running maven -o tomcat from
>> G\modules\assembly.
>> This seems to work because when I start the server I see that tomcat
>> is using port 8080.
>> 8009 0.0.0.0 Tomcat Connector AJP
>> 8080 0.0.0.0 Tomcat Connector HTTP
>> 8090 0.0.0.0 Jetty Connector HTTP
>> However, then I try to interact with the management implementation
>> the JettyLogManagerImpl is what is being invoked rather than the
>> TomcatLogManagerImpl.
>> Am I doing something wrong when trying to configure for tomcat as the
>> default? I'll keep looking ....
>> Joe
>> Jeff Genender wrote:
>>> Yes...the 0.0.0.0 is from line 208 of the j2ee-tomcat-plan.xml,
>>> which uses the PlanServerHostname from maven.xml (which happens to
>>> be 0.0.0.0):
>>>
>>> prefix=${PlanServerHostname}_access_log.
>>>
>>> We can change this via configuration. However, keep in mind this
>>> can change since its configurable. Especially when using virtual
>>> hosts, people like to have multiple log files...so they may have one
>>> that says 0.0.0.0_access_log, and one that says foo_access_log, etc.
>>>
>>> IMHO, I don't like the "0.0.0.0" in the access_log name. I prefer
>>> "localhost".
>>>
>>> Thanks for looking into this, Joe.
>>>
>>> Jeff
>>>
>>> Joe Bohn (JIRA) wrote:
>>>
>>>> [
>>>> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1029?
>>>> page=comments#action_12330793 ]
>>>> Joe Bohn commented on GERONIMO-1029:
>>>> ------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> I created the jira because there are never any records displayed in
>>>> the web access log viewer when G is configured using tomcat. I
>>>> created it against both tomcat and management because I was not
>>>> sure where the problem existed. I thought tomcat might have a
>>>> problem because I expected the 0.0.0.0 to be the date in the file
>>>> name. However, based upon Jeff'scomments the problem may be in the
>>>> management implementation. I'll take a look.
>>>>
>>>> Btw, I did not yet create the jira for multiple log file processing.
>>>>
>>>>> tomcat web log seems to be created with wrong name and isn't found
>>>>> by the web log viewer portlet
>>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> -----------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> Key: GERONIMO-1029
>>>>> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1029
>>>>> Project: Geronimo
>>>>> Type: Bug
>>>>> Components: management, Tomcat
>>>>> Versions: 1.0-M5
>>>>> Environment: all
>>>>> Reporter: Joe Bohn
>>>>> Assignee: Jeff Genender
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> It seems that the log file for the tomcat web container is being
>>>>> created with an invalid date in the name. ex.
>>>>> ...geronimo\modules\assembly\target\geronimo-1.0-
>>>>> SNAPSHOT\var\catalina\logs\0.0.0.0_access_log.2005-09-28.txt
>>>>> Possibly related (or possibly not) is that the management API
>>>>> cannot find matches when performing a search.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>
> --
> Joe Bohn
> joe.bohn@earthlink.net
>
> "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep, to gain what he cannot
> lose." -- Jim Elliot
>
Re: [jira] Commented: (GERONIMO-1029) tomcat web log seems to be
created with wrong name and isn't found by the web log viewer portlet
Posted by Joe Bohn <jo...@earthlink.net>.
It turns out this isn't a problem with tomcat, the web log viewer
portlet, or even really the management interface. However, it is a bit
related to running multiple containers concurrently.
The problem is that when we query the kernel get the WebManagerNames
from within the portlet(s) we get back an array of 2 (tomcat and jetty).
In several places in the console we assume that the container that we
need to reference to provide appropriate management information (ie. the
container in which the console is currently running) will always be the
first entry in the array. Bad assumption. In my case the console is
running in the tomcat container but we're attempting to manage the jetty
container.
So now I just have to come up with a way to detect which WebManager is
the one for the "default" container.
Joe
Joe Bohn wrote:
> Thanks for the information Jeff. Right now I'd just like to get it
> working with the current log name tomcat. Sometime after that I'll try
> to look into supporting various naming formats, multiple log files, etc...
>
> I think something really strange is going on with my system (or perhaps
> the G image itself) regarding the management interface. I build G with
> tomcat as the default by running maven -o tomcat from G\modules\assembly.
> This seems to work because when I start the server I see that tomcat is
> using port 8080.
> 8009 0.0.0.0 Tomcat Connector AJP
> 8080 0.0.0.0 Tomcat Connector HTTP
> 8090 0.0.0.0 Jetty Connector HTTP
> However, then I try to interact with the management implementation the
> JettyLogManagerImpl is what is being invoked rather than the
> TomcatLogManagerImpl.
>
> Am I doing something wrong when trying to configure for tomcat as the
> default? I'll keep looking ....
>
> Joe
>
>
> Jeff Genender wrote:
>
>> Yes...the 0.0.0.0 is from line 208 of the j2ee-tomcat-plan.xml, which
>> uses the PlanServerHostname from maven.xml (which happens to be 0.0.0.0):
>>
>> prefix=${PlanServerHostname}_access_log.
>>
>> We can change this via configuration. However, keep in mind this can
>> change since its configurable. Especially when using virtual hosts,
>> people like to have multiple log files...so they may have one that
>> says 0.0.0.0_access_log, and one that says foo_access_log, etc.
>>
>> IMHO, I don't like the "0.0.0.0" in the access_log name. I prefer
>> "localhost".
>>
>> Thanks for looking into this, Joe.
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>> Joe Bohn (JIRA) wrote:
>>
>>> [
>>> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1029?page=comments#action_12330793
>>> ]
>>> Joe Bohn commented on GERONIMO-1029:
>>> ------------------------------------
>>>
>>> I created the jira because there are never any records displayed in
>>> the web access log viewer when G is configured using tomcat. I
>>> created it against both tomcat and management because I was not sure
>>> where the problem existed. I thought tomcat might have a problem
>>> because I expected the 0.0.0.0 to be the date in the file name.
>>> However, based upon Jeff'scomments the problem may be in the
>>> management implementation. I'll take a look.
>>>
>>> Btw, I did not yet create the jira for multiple log file processing.
>>>
>>>> tomcat web log seems to be created with wrong name and isn't found
>>>> by the web log viewer portlet
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Key: GERONIMO-1029
>>>> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1029
>>>> Project: Geronimo
>>>> Type: Bug
>>>> Components: management, Tomcat
>>>> Versions: 1.0-M5
>>>> Environment: all
>>>> Reporter: Joe Bohn
>>>> Assignee: Jeff Genender
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> It seems that the log file for the tomcat web container is being
>>>> created with an invalid date in the name. ex.
>>>> ...geronimo\modules\assembly\target\geronimo-1.0-SNAPSHOT\var\catalina\logs\0.0.0.0_access_log.2005-09-28.txt
>>>>
>>>> Possibly related (or possibly not) is that the management API cannot
>>>> find matches when performing a search.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
--
Joe Bohn
joe.bohn@earthlink.net
"He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep, to gain what he cannot
lose." -- Jim Elliot
Re: [jira] Commented: (GERONIMO-1029) tomcat web log seems to be
created with wrong name and isn't found by the web log viewer portlet
Posted by Joe Bohn <jo...@earthlink.net>.
Thanks for the information Jeff. Right now I'd just like to get it
working with the current log name tomcat. Sometime after that I'll try
to look into supporting various naming formats, multiple log files, etc...
I think something really strange is going on with my system (or perhaps
the G image itself) regarding the management interface. I build G
with tomcat as the default by running maven -o tomcat from
G\modules\assembly.
This seems to work because when I start the server I see that tomcat is
using port 8080.
8009 0.0.0.0 Tomcat Connector AJP
8080 0.0.0.0 Tomcat Connector HTTP
8090 0.0.0.0 Jetty Connector HTTP
However, then I try to interact with the management implementation the
JettyLogManagerImpl is what is being invoked rather than the
TomcatLogManagerImpl.
Am I doing something wrong when trying to configure for tomcat as the
default? I'll keep looking ....
Joe
Jeff Genender wrote:
> Yes...the 0.0.0.0 is from line 208 of the j2ee-tomcat-plan.xml, which
> uses the PlanServerHostname from maven.xml (which happens to be 0.0.0.0):
>
> prefix=${PlanServerHostname}_access_log.
>
> We can change this via configuration. However, keep in mind this can
> change since its configurable. Especially when using virtual hosts,
> people like to have multiple log files...so they may have one that says
> 0.0.0.0_access_log, and one that says foo_access_log, etc.
>
> IMHO, I don't like the "0.0.0.0" in the access_log name. I prefer
> "localhost".
>
> Thanks for looking into this, Joe.
>
> Jeff
>
> Joe Bohn (JIRA) wrote:
>
>> [
>> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1029?page=comments#action_12330793
>> ]
>> Joe Bohn commented on GERONIMO-1029:
>> ------------------------------------
>>
>> I created the jira because there are never any records displayed in
>> the web access log viewer when G is configured using tomcat.
>> I created it against both tomcat and management because I was not sure
>> where the problem existed. I thought tomcat might have a problem
>> because I expected the 0.0.0.0 to be the date in the file name.
>> However, based upon Jeff'scomments the problem may be in the
>> management implementation. I'll take a look.
>>
>> Btw, I did not yet create the jira for multiple log file processing.
>>
>>> tomcat web log seems to be created with wrong name and isn't found by
>>> the web log viewer portlet
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>> Key: GERONIMO-1029
>>> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1029
>>> Project: Geronimo
>>> Type: Bug
>>> Components: management, Tomcat
>>> Versions: 1.0-M5
>>> Environment: all
>>> Reporter: Joe Bohn
>>> Assignee: Jeff Genender
>>
>>
>>
>>> It seems that the log file for the tomcat web container is being
>>> created with an invalid date in the name. ex.
>>> ...geronimo\modules\assembly\target\geronimo-1.0-SNAPSHOT\var\catalina\logs\0.0.0.0_access_log.2005-09-28.txt
>>>
>>> Possibly related (or possibly not) is that the management API cannot
>>> find matches when performing a search.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
--
Joe Bohn
joe.bohn@earthlink.net
"He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep, to gain what he cannot
lose." -- Jim Elliot
Re: [jira] Commented: (GERONIMO-1029) tomcat web log seems to be
created with wrong name and isn't found by the web log viewer portlet
Posted by Jeff Genender <jg...@savoirtech.com>.
Yes...the 0.0.0.0 is from line 208 of the j2ee-tomcat-plan.xml, which
uses the PlanServerHostname from maven.xml (which happens to be 0.0.0.0):
prefix=${PlanServerHostname}_access_log.
We can change this via configuration. However, keep in mind this can
change since its configurable. Especially when using virtual hosts,
people like to have multiple log files...so they may have one that says
0.0.0.0_access_log, and one that says foo_access_log, etc.
IMHO, I don't like the "0.0.0.0" in the access_log name. I prefer
"localhost".
Thanks for looking into this, Joe.
Jeff
Joe Bohn (JIRA) wrote:
> [ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1029?page=comments#action_12330793 ]
>
> Joe Bohn commented on GERONIMO-1029:
> ------------------------------------
>
> I created the jira because there are never any records displayed in the web access log viewer when G is configured using tomcat.
>
> I created it against both tomcat and management because I was not sure where the problem existed. I thought tomcat might have a problem because I expected the 0.0.0.0 to be the date in the file name. However, based upon Jeff'scomments the problem may be in the management implementation. I'll take a look.
>
> Btw, I did not yet create the jira for multiple log file processing.
>
>
>>tomcat web log seems to be created with wrong name and isn't found by the web log viewer portlet
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Key: GERONIMO-1029
>> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1029
>> Project: Geronimo
>> Type: Bug
>> Components: management, Tomcat
>> Versions: 1.0-M5
>> Environment: all
>> Reporter: Joe Bohn
>> Assignee: Jeff Genender
>
>
>>It seems that the log file for the tomcat web container is being created with an invalid date in the name.
>>ex. ...geronimo\modules\assembly\target\geronimo-1.0-SNAPSHOT\var\catalina\logs\0.0.0.0_access_log.2005-09-28.txt
>>Possibly related (or possibly not) is that the management API cannot find matches when performing a search.
>
>
[jira] Commented: (GERONIMO-1029) tomcat web log seems to be created with wrong name and isn't found by the web log viewer portlet
Posted by "Joe Bohn (JIRA)" <de...@geronimo.apache.org>.
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1029?page=comments#action_12330793 ]
Joe Bohn commented on GERONIMO-1029:
------------------------------------
I created the jira because there are never any records displayed in the web access log viewer when G is configured using tomcat.
I created it against both tomcat and management because I was not sure where the problem existed. I thought tomcat might have a problem because I expected the 0.0.0.0 to be the date in the file name. However, based upon Jeff'scomments the problem may be in the management implementation. I'll take a look.
Btw, I did not yet create the jira for multiple log file processing.
> tomcat web log seems to be created with wrong name and isn't found by the web log viewer portlet
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: GERONIMO-1029
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1029
> Project: Geronimo
> Type: Bug
> Components: management, Tomcat
> Versions: 1.0-M5
> Environment: all
> Reporter: Joe Bohn
> Assignee: Jeff Genender
>
> It seems that the log file for the tomcat web container is being created with an invalid date in the name.
> ex. ...geronimo\modules\assembly\target\geronimo-1.0-SNAPSHOT\var\catalina\logs\0.0.0.0_access_log.2005-09-28.txt
> Possibly related (or possibly not) is that the management API cannot find matches when performing a search.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see:
http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] Assigned: (GERONIMO-1029) tomcat web log seems to be created with wrong name and isn't found by the web log viewer portlet
Posted by "Jeff Genender (JIRA)" <de...@geronimo.apache.org>.
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1029?page=all ]
Jeff Genender reassigned GERONIMO-1029:
---------------------------------------
Assign To: Jeff Genender
> tomcat web log seems to be created with wrong name and isn't found by the web log viewer portlet
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: GERONIMO-1029
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1029
> Project: Geronimo
> Type: Bug
> Components: management, Tomcat
> Versions: 1.0-M5
> Environment: all
> Reporter: Joe Bohn
> Assignee: Jeff Genender
>
> It seems that the log file for the tomcat web container is being created with an invalid date in the name.
> ex. ...geronimo\modules\assembly\target\geronimo-1.0-SNAPSHOT\var\catalina\logs\0.0.0.0_access_log.2005-09-28.txt
> Possibly related (or possibly not) is that the management API cannot find matches when performing a search.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see:
http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] Commented: (GERONIMO-1029) tomcat web log seems to be created with wrong name and isn't found by the web log viewer portlet
Posted by "Joe Bohn (JIRA)" <de...@geronimo.apache.org>.
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1029?page=comments#action_12331196 ]
Joe Bohn commented on GERONIMO-1029:
------------------------------------
It turns out this isn't a problem with tomcat, the web log viewer portlet, or even really the management interface. However, it is a bit related to running multiple containers concurrently.
The problem is that when we query the kernel get the WebManagerNames from within the portlet(s) we get back an array of 2 (tomcat and jetty). In several places in the console we assume that the container that we need to reference to provide appropriate management information (ie. the container in which the console is currently running) will always be the first entry in the array. Bad assumption. In my case the console is running in the tomcat container but we're attempting to manage the jetty container.
So now we just have to come up with a way to detect which WebManager is the one for the "default" container (assuming that we continue to support multiple concurrent containers.... in which case not only console web log viewers but other components also have problems that must be fixed).
> tomcat web log seems to be created with wrong name and isn't found by the web log viewer portlet
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: GERONIMO-1029
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1029
> Project: Geronimo
> Type: Bug
> Components: management, Tomcat
> Versions: 1.0-M5
> Environment: all
> Reporter: Joe Bohn
> Assignee: Jeff Genender
>
> It seems that the log file for the tomcat web container is being created with an invalid date in the name.
> ex. ...geronimo\modules\assembly\target\geronimo-1.0-SNAPSHOT\var\catalina\logs\0.0.0.0_access_log.2005-09-28.txt
> Possibly related (or possibly not) is that the management API cannot find matches when performing a search.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see:
http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] Commented: (GERONIMO-1029) tomcat web log seems to be created with wrong name and isn't found by the web log viewer portlet
Posted by "Jeff Genender (JIRA)" <de...@geronimo.apache.org>.
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1029?page=comments#action_12330767 ]
Jeff Genender commented on GERONIMO-1029:
-----------------------------------------
This is the default date for the naming conventions for the access valves for Tomcat. It looks correct according to its design (See http://jakarta.apache.org/tomcat/tomcat-5.5-doc/config/valve.html).
Please explain what is the format you need the date to look like as its configurable using the fileDateFormat paramater in the initParams attribute of the j2ee-tomcat-plan.xml file.
> tomcat web log seems to be created with wrong name and isn't found by the web log viewer portlet
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: GERONIMO-1029
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1029
> Project: Geronimo
> Type: Bug
> Components: management, Tomcat
> Versions: 1.0-M5
> Environment: all
> Reporter: Joe Bohn
>
> It seems that the log file for the tomcat web container is being created with an invalid date in the name.
> ex. ...geronimo\modules\assembly\target\geronimo-1.0-SNAPSHOT\var\catalina\logs\0.0.0.0_access_log.2005-09-28.txt
> Possibly related (or possibly not) is that the management API cannot find matches when performing a search.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see:
http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] Closed: (GERONIMO-1029) tomcat web log seems to be created with wrong name and isn't found by the web log viewer portlet
Posted by "Joe Bohn (JIRA)" <de...@geronimo.apache.org>.
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1029?page=all ]
Joe Bohn closed GERONIMO-1029:
------------------------------
Fix Version: 1.0
Resolution: Invalid
As the comments indicate ... this was never really a problem. The Tomcat log viewer capability was added under another JIRA, GERONIMO-1015 and extended after that with several other JIRAS, GERONIMO-1028, GERONIMO-1068, etc...
> tomcat web log seems to be created with wrong name and isn't found by the web log viewer portlet
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: GERONIMO-1029
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1029
> Project: Geronimo
> Type: Bug
> Components: management, Tomcat
> Versions: 1.0-M5
> Environment: all
> Reporter: Joe Bohn
> Assignee: Jeff Genender
> Fix For: 1.0
>
> It seems that the log file for the tomcat web container is being created with an invalid date in the name.
> ex. ...geronimo\modules\assembly\target\geronimo-1.0-SNAPSHOT\var\catalina\logs\0.0.0.0_access_log.2005-09-28.txt
> Possibly related (or possibly not) is that the management API cannot find matches when performing a search.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see:
http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] Commented: (GERONIMO-1029) tomcat web log seems to be created with wrong name and isn't found by the web log viewer portlet
Posted by "Aaron Mulder (JIRA)" <de...@geronimo.apache.org>.
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1029?page=comments#action_12330770 ]
Aaron Mulder commented on GERONIMO-1029:
----------------------------------------
There is no "needed format" -- the format used by the TomcatLogManagerImpl just needs to match the format used by the Tomcat access log valve. I took a stab at this, and it worked in my initial tests, but that's not to say it's totally correct.
See modules/tomcat/src/java/o/a/g/t/TomcatLogManagerImpl lines 78-84 or so.
This needs to be refactored a bit so if the user passes in a date range we can identify a group of log files (Joe filed a JIRA for this), but the basic identification of the log file we're looking for appears on line 83-84.
To see if it's working, fire up the console, go to the server log tab, and see if there are any web access log hits in the bottom portlet.
> tomcat web log seems to be created with wrong name and isn't found by the web log viewer portlet
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: GERONIMO-1029
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1029
> Project: Geronimo
> Type: Bug
> Components: management, Tomcat
> Versions: 1.0-M5
> Environment: all
> Reporter: Joe Bohn
> Assignee: Jeff Genender
>
> It seems that the log file for the tomcat web container is being created with an invalid date in the name.
> ex. ...geronimo\modules\assembly\target\geronimo-1.0-SNAPSHOT\var\catalina\logs\0.0.0.0_access_log.2005-09-28.txt
> Possibly related (or possibly not) is that the management API cannot find matches when performing a search.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see:
http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira