========================================================================= Date: Mon, 31 May 1999 21:55:02 +1700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: jim@rubylane.com Subject: Re: Executing .tcl script in "pages" directory Comments: cc: mckee70@HOME.COM In-Reply-To: <37531BF6.26FF@home.com> from "Jay McKee" at May 31, 99 07:32:06 pm Content-Type: text > > Hello, > > I have 2 problems: > > 1) Getting Tcl scripts to run through Aolserver. I can't get a simple > "hello world" script to execute. I have set the shared and server tcl > specific paths and set "Tcl enabled" to On. When I type > "http://ocean:8000/tcltest.tcl", Netscape outputs the entire contents of > the script instead of the scripts output. the script is just "ns_return > 200 text/plain "This is a Tcl Test" ". I have looked through the > AOLserver docs plus dejanews, arsdigita, and search engines to no avail. > I'm sure its something simple or I'm not understanding it correctly. > Did you restart the server after you enabled TCL pages? > 2) It says "unknown URL" when I go to the AOL Server Administration > link. > The admin page is needed to help solve my first problem. The virtual server admin page is at ocean:8000/NS/Admin. There can be multiple of these per installation of AOLServer, one for each virtual server you configure. The setup server admin page is at ocean:9876. There is only one of these per installation of AOLServer. Hope this helps. -Jim ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 2 Jun 1999 01:57:47 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Jay McKee Subject: Tcl Pages MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Thanks to all those who responded with help. Unfortunately, I had already done everything that was advised. I enabled Tcl. Restarted Aolserver after every change. Checked the .ini file, just to make sure...I am able to run .adp files and use tcl functions mapped to URLs from the libraries, but still can't get .tcl files to execute, more importantly, still can't get to the Admin page. After geting no luck I decideded to re-install and start over. I know this sounds crazy, but I've boiled the problem of not getting an Admin page to setting the paths for the virtual server and shared tcl directories. In the "Tcl scripting" section of setup: If I set the directories to paths such as /home/nsadmin/AOLserver/servers/server1/tcl and /home/nsadmin/AOLserver/servers/tcl then restart and then click on "Connect To Admin Page", it says "URL not found http://ocean:8000/NS/Admin". But if I go in and delete those paths to null, hit restart, then click on "Connect To Admin Page", it takes me right to the Admin page at "http://ocean:8000/NS/Admin". Very bizaar...I don't have a clue why this is confusing AOLserver. I have verified this many times and can go back and forth. The problem is I can't set paths for the tcl libraries without knocking out the Admin pages. All advise given yesterday I have checked that I am doing it correct. I have read the docs many times. This is beyond anything in the docs.... Sorry to keep retreading this issue. I'm just trying to get off the runway 8). Thanks for any help. Jay McKee ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jun 1999 10:58:17 +0100 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Paul d'Haens Subject: AOLserver Open Source, Version 3.0 ??? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT "AOLserver Open Source, Version 3.0, Coming Soon!" Seen on http://www.aolserver.com Can anyone confirm this ? ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jun 1999 12:06:59 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: The Voks Sayeth Subject: Re: AOLSERVER Digest - 1 Jun 1999 to 2 Jun 1999 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii maybe the specification in setup uses directories relative to the AOLserver home ? later, arun --- Automatic digest processor wrote: > There is one message totalling 46 lines in this > issue. > > Topics of the day: > > 1. Tcl Pages > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jun 1999 08:58:43 +0200 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Sebastian Skracic Subject: Re: AOLSERVER Digest - 1 Jun 1999 to 2 Jun 1999 Comments: cc: Jay McKee In-Reply-To: <199906030406.AAA19339@services.web.aol.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII > /home/nsadmin/AOLserver/servers/server1/tcl and > /home/nsadmin/AOLserver/servers/tcl I think that those are wrong. They should be (in your case): /home/nsadmin/AOLserver/servers/server1/modules/tcl (private) /home/nsadmin/AOLserver/modules/tcl (shared) BTW, URL /NS/Admin is registered in one of the scripts in shared Tcl directory, hence all this weird behaviour. > then restart and then click on "Connect To Admin Page", it says "URL not > found http://ocean:8000/NS/Admin". But if I go in and delete those paths > to null, hit restart, then click on "Connect To Admin Page", it takes me > right to the Admin page at "http://ocean:8000/NS/Admin". On the other hand, if you don't explicitly set these dirs, AOLServer assumes (correctly) default path relative to root installation dir. HTH, Seb. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 3 Jun 1999 17:56:49 +0100 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: John Browning Subject: newbie question: drivers for solid and psql MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; Charset=US-ASCII I'm having trouble getting database drivers working with AOLServer. The postgres server cannot seem to connect to a database. I have checked the port and database name, and can connect to them with psql. Yet I keep getting an error about no connection, please check if postmaster is running on 5432. Does anybody have any experience or suggestions? Could it be that the drivers need updating? We're postgres 6.4.2 and the drivers talk about '95. The Solid server doesn't seem to work at all. Though I install nssolid.so, no database options appear in the virtual server administration page. Presumably the problem is that we're using -- or trying to use -- Solid 3.0. Has anybody had any experience or updated drivers for this version? (Solid doesn't, and suggests reverting to 2.3.) Lastly, a bonus question, has anybody built shared libraries -- eg database drivers, with gcc on Solaris. The makefile lists options for SunPro and I'm having trouble getting it to work with gcc (using the postgres driver as a test) just in case I ever find time and energy to try to update the drivers. One bad sign is that my rebuilt libraries are perhaps a fifth the size of the original drivers. And they don't work at all, not even as little as the existing postgres drivers. Thanks in advance for any help. John Browning ||| 71 Richmond Ave ||| London N1 0LX t + 44 171 700 1230 ||| f + 44 171 700 5255 ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jun 1999 23:30:49 -0500 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: "J. Michael Roberts" Subject: Re: AOLserver Open Source, Version 3.0 ??? In-Reply-To: <2655D06033@xenia.glo.be> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Hot diggety dawg, I see it, too!! Dang, that's the best news I've had this week! On Fri, 4 Jun 1999, Paul d'Haens wrote: > "AOLserver Open Source, Version 3.0, Coming Soon!" > Seen on http://www.aolserver.com > > Can anyone confirm this ? > ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jun 1999 23:45:05 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Neal Sidhwaney Subject: Re: AOLSERVER Digest - 2 Jun 1999 to 4 Jun 1999 In-Reply-To: <199906050403.AAA11822@services.web.aol.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII As to the open source AOLserver 3.0, why do you need to "confirm" it if its on their web page? must be pretty reliable to the person who was having trouble interpreting ADP pages, did you go into the ADP setup of the virtual server and tell it the extensions to parse as ADP pages? neal ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jun 1999 20:04:48 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Dominic Tracey Subject: Re: AOLSERVER Digest - 1 Jun 1999 to 2 Jun 1999 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit A couple of observations since I just had something like this happen. There is a method in the shared init.tcl called ns_adminlink or something. If you look at the system log after you restart you might see that this proc is undefined. The other observation is that I created a private tcl file named admin.tcl and all of a sudden I was getting 404's on the virtual server admin page. When I renamed it to controlpanel.tcl, I got my admin page back. Did any one else notice the Open Source announcement on www.aolserver.com? Woohoo! D > > > Thanks to all those who responded with help. > Unfortunately, I had already done everything that was advised. > > I enabled Tcl. Restarted Aolserver after every change. Checked the .ini > file, just to make sure...I am able to run .adp files and use tcl > functions mapped to URLs from the libraries, but still can't get .tcl > files to execute, more importantly, still can't get to the Admin page. > > After geting no luck I decideded to re-install and start over. I know > this sounds crazy, but I've boiled the problem of not getting an Admin > page to setting the paths for the virtual server and shared tcl > directories. > > In the "Tcl scripting" section of setup: > > If I set the directories to paths such as > > /home/nsadmin/AOLserver/servers/server1/tcl and > /home/nsadmin/AOLserver/servers/tcl > > then restart and then click on "Connect To Admin Page", it says "URL not > found http://ocean:8000/NS/Admin". But if I go in and delete those paths > to null, hit restart, then click on "Connect To Admin Page", it takes me > right to the Admin page at "http://ocean:8000/NS/Admin". > > Very bizaar...I don't have a clue why this is confusing AOLserver. I > have verified this many times and can go back and forth. The problem is > I can't set paths for the tcl libraries without knocking out the Admin > pages. > > All advise given yesterday I have checked that I am doing it correct. I > have read the docs many times. This is beyond anything in the docs.... > > Sorry to keep retreading this issue. I'm just trying to get off the > runway 8). > > Thanks for any help. > > Jay McKee > > ------------------------------ > > End of AOLSERVER Digest - 1 Jun 1999 to 2 Jun 1999 > ************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 4 Jun 1999 19:29:37 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: jim@rubylane.com Subject: Re: AOLserver Open Source, Version 3.0 ??? In-Reply-To: <2655D06033@xenia.glo.be> from "Paul d'Haens" at Jun 4, 99 10:58:17 am Content-Type: text Hurray!! > "AOLserver Open Source, Version 3.0, Coming Soon!" > Seen on http://www.aolserver.com > > Can anyone confirm this ? ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 5 Jun 1999 00:08:43 -0400 Reply-To: philg@mit.edu Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Philip Greenspun Subject: Re: AOLSERVER Digest - 2 Jun 1999 to 4 Jun 1999 In-Reply-To: <199906050407.AAA11873@services.web.aol.com> (message from Automatic digest processor on Sat, 5 Jun 1999 00:03:04 -0400) Date: Fri, 4 Jun 1999 10:58:17 +0100 From: Paul d'Haens Subject: AOLserver Open Source, Version 3.0 ??? "AOLserver Open Source, Version 3.0, Coming Soon!" Seen on http://www.aolserver.com Can anyone confirm this ? Paul, I'd venture to say that anyone with a Web browser and Internet connection can confirm this (hint: type "http://www.aolserver.com" into the browser) :-) Regards, Philip ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 5 Jun 1999 19:01:42 -0500 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: "J. Michael Roberts" Subject: Re: AOLSERVER Digest - 2 Jun 1999 to 4 Jun 1999 Comments: To: philg@mit.edu In-Reply-To: <199906050408.AAA13320@baden.ai.mit.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Well, *I* didn't want to put it that bluntly, but thanks for the laugh, Phil. On Sat, 5 Jun 1999, Philip Greenspun wrote: > Date: Fri, 4 Jun 1999 10:58:17 +0100 > From: Paul d'Haens > Subject: AOLserver Open Source, Version 3.0 ??? > > "AOLserver Open Source, Version 3.0, Coming Soon!" > Seen on http://www.aolserver.com > > Can anyone confirm this ? > > Paul, I'd venture to say that anyone with a Web browser and Internet > connection can confirm this (hint: type "http://www.aolserver.com" into > the browser) :-) > > Regards, > > Philip > ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 6 Jun 1999 10:13:55 +0200 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Bas Scheffers Subject: newbie question: drivers for solid and psql In-Reply-To: <199906060342.FAA11258@s025.widexs.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 00:02 06-06-1999 -0400, you wrote: >I'm having trouble getting database drivers working with AOLServer. >The postgres server cannot seem to connect to a database. Have you started the postmaster with the -i option? That's to tell it to listen to tcp/ip. Check it with netstat. On my installation, even when I enter a username in aolserver, it insist on connection with the username 'aolserver', so that's also one to check for. I just made a login for the user 'aolserver' in postgres, the stupid thing is: psql can't use usernames longer than 8 characters, so there's no way to use this login with psql. (Just one of the reasons I go for a real RDBMS like Sybase or at least Solid.) >The Solid server doesn't seem to work at all. Though I install nssolid.so, no database options appear in the >virtual server administration page. Presumably the problem is that we're using -- or trying to use -- Solid 3.0. Has >anybody had any experience or updated drivers for this version? (Solid doesn't, and suggests reverting to 2.3.) I haven't tried Solid 3, but are you sure the datasource is ok? tcp/ip hostname 1313, if I'm not mistaken (it's been a while). >One bad sign is that my rebuilt libraries are perhaps a fifth the size of the original drivers. And they don't work at >all, not even as little as the existing postgres drivers. That's normal behaviour for the postgres driver on Linux, so I'm not surprised it's like that on Solaris too. Don't worry about the size, if there are no errors when compiling they should would. Cheers, Bas. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jun 1999 12:27:11 +0100 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Paul d'Haens Subject: Re: AOLSERVER Digest - 2 Jun 1999 to 4 Jun 1999 In-Reply-To: <199906050408.AAA13320@baden.ai.mit.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT On 5 Jun 99, at 0:08 Philip Greenspun wrote: > Paul, I'd venture to say that anyone with a Web browser and Internet > connection can confirm this (hint: type "http://www.aolserver.com" into > the browser) :-) I was just wondering why such major news is announced with an one-liner, carefully hidden at the bottom of a page nobody bothers to check. I still need item in http://www.aolserver.com/server/news.html or an announcement by the development team on this list to be convinced. Call me Thomas. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 7 Jun 1999 12:39:36 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: "Heisler, Hal" Subject: Re: AOLserver Open Source, Version 3.0 ??? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" The message has been changed. No mention of open source. -----Original Message----- From: J. Michael Roberts [mailto:mirobert@cs.indiana.edu] Sent: Friday, June 04, 1999 9:31 PM To: Multiple recipients of list AOLSERVER Subject: Re: AOLserver Open Source, Version 3.0 ??? Hot diggety dawg, I see it, too!! Dang, that's the best news I've had this week! On Fri, 4 Jun 1999, Paul d'Haens wrote: > "AOLserver Open Source, Version 3.0, Coming Soon!" > Seen on http://www.aolserver.com > > Can anyone confirm this ? > ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 10 Jun 1999 12:08:30 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Ganju Jayaraman Subject: linux 6.0 / AOLServer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii hello, we are considering to purchase the following PC system: - RedHat Linux 6.0 - 2 CPU, 450 MHz - 256 MB does anyone see a problem with running AOLServer on such a system? i seem to recall that there was a problem running AOLserver with Linux kernel 2.2 and SMP support. please help us not to make a mistake in spending money for an expensive system. - g.r. _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 10 Jun 1999 15:01:10 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: jim@rubylane.com Subject: Re: linux 6.0 / AOLServer Comments: cc: ganju_98@YAHOO.COM In-Reply-To: <19990610190830.1110.rocketmail@web601.yahoomail.com> from "Ganju Jayaraman" at Jun 10, 99 12:08:30 pm Content-Type: text Hi - we are using AOLServer in a production environment on Redhat Linux 5.2 w/2.0.36 compiled with SMP support on a dual Intel 400 MHz CPU machine. With the non-SMP Linux kernel, things are fairly stable. The server does crash a few times a week, but restarts itself immediately. This is about a 2 second outage. Still not great, because any outstanding database stuff has the potential to get hosed. We tried using the SMP kernel, but ran into several issues. We are using the Solid database software (2.2). With the SMP kernel, AOLServer crashed very often when doing DB selects. We had a test program that could make the server crash by doing some selects in 5 threads. The Solid database software never crashed - only AOLServer. We changed the AOLServer config to use only 1 database connection, and that worked better. But our server was still crashing several times a day (and restarting itself). The bad thing about these crashes is that if there are database operations in progress, the database could be left in an inconsistent state. We have also had a few nagging problems, like exec'ing external programs sometimes locks up, creeping memory leaks, and a weird one where nssolid.so (the AOLServer Solid driver shared library) won't load; it gives errors about unresolved symbols. I believe this is a Linux issue, because it is much worse with the 2.2.9 kernel than with 2.0.36. (I can't get AOLServer 2.3.2 to run reliably on a 2.2.9 kernel even on a single CPU machine). We'd like to run SMP 2.2.9 kernel, but I can't get it stable enough to upgrade our production servers. The AOLServer source is not available, and I can't get it to core dump when it restarts, so we are not able to solve this problem. I would recommend running AOLServer with 2.0.36 on a single-CPU kernel. We're using that in production with about 250K hits/day. AOLServer is very CPU friendly - we wanted dual CPU's because we do full-text searches in an external CGI program... Hope this helps you out. Jim www.rubylane.com > > hello, we are considering to purchase the following PC system: > - RedHat Linux 6.0 > - 2 CPU, 450 MHz > - 256 MB > > does anyone see a problem with running AOLServer on such a system? > > i seem to recall that there was a problem running AOLserver with Linux > kernel 2.2 and SMP support. > > please help us not to make a mistake in spending money for an expensive > system. > > - g.r. > > _________________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com > ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 01:17:18 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Brad Chick Subject: Re: AOLSERVER Digest - 7 Jun 1999 to 10 Jun 1999 Comments: cc: Ganju Jayaraman In-Reply-To: <199906110406.AAA04712@services.web.aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed At 12:06 AM 6/11/99 -0400, you wrote: >There are 2 messages totalling 98 lines in this issue. > >Topics of the day: > > 1. linux 6.0 / AOLServer (2) > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >Date: Thu, 10 Jun 1999 12:08:30 -0700 >From: Ganju Jayaraman >Subject: linux 6.0 / AOLServer > >hello, we are considering to purchase the following PC system: > - RedHat Linux 6.0 > - 2 CPU, 450 MHz > - 256 MB > >does anyone see a problem with running AOLServer on such a system? > >i seem to recall that there was a problem running AOLserver with Linux >kernel 2.2 and SMP support. > >please help us not to make a mistake in spending money for an expensive >system. > >- g.r. We are running AOLServer in a production environment on Redhat Linux 5.2 w/2.0.36 on a dual Intel 450 MHz CPU machine with 512MB We are also running Oracle 8.0.5. I think the answer to your question is going to turn on how db intense your site is. Are you going to run a db-backed site? And if so, which db will you choose? Our site gets some traffic transferring nearly 1G per day with 10s of thousands of db queries per day. Oracle is great. AOLServer goes down a couple times a week though. >_________________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com > >------------------------------ > >Date: Thu, 10 Jun 1999 15:01:10 -0700 >From: jim@rubylane.com >Subject: Re: linux 6.0 / AOLServer > >Hi - we are using AOLServer in a production environment on Redhat >Linux 5.2 w/2.0.36 compiled with SMP support on a dual Intel >400 MHz CPU machine. > >With the non-SMP Linux kernel, things are fairly stable. The server >does crash a few times a week, but restarts itself immediately. This >is about a 2 second outage. Still not great, because any outstanding >database stuff has the potential to get hosed. > >We tried using the SMP kernel, but ran into several issues. We are >using the Solid database software (2.2). With the SMP kernel, >AOLServer crashed very often when doing DB selects. We had a test >program that could make the server crash by doing some selects in >5 threads. The Solid database software never crashed - only AOLServer. > >We changed the AOLServer config to use only 1 database connection, and >that worked better. But our server was still crashing several times >a day (and restarting itself). > >The bad thing about these crashes is that if there are database operations >in progress, the database could be left in an inconsistent state. > >We have also had a few nagging problems, like exec'ing external programs >sometimes locks up, creeping memory leaks, and a weird one where >nssolid.so (the AOLServer Solid driver shared library) won't load; it >gives errors about unresolved symbols. I believe this is a Linux >issue, because it is much worse with the 2.2.9 kernel than with >2.0.36. (I can't get AOLServer 2.3.2 to run reliably on a 2.2.9 >kernel even on a single CPU machine). > >We'd like to run SMP 2.2.9 kernel, but I can't get it stable enough >to upgrade our production servers. The AOLServer source is not >available, and I can't get it to core dump when it restarts, so >we are not able to solve this problem. > >I would recommend running AOLServer with 2.0.36 on a single-CPU >kernel. We're using that in production with about 250K hits/day. >AOLServer is very CPU friendly - we wanted dual CPU's because we >do full-text searches in an external CGI program... > >Hope this helps you out. > >Jim >www.rubylane.com > > > > > > hello, we are considering to purchase the following PC system: > > - RedHat Linux 6.0 > > - 2 CPU, 450 MHz > > - 256 MB > > > > does anyone see a problem with running AOLServer on such a system? > > > > i seem to recall that there was a problem running AOLserver with Linux > > kernel 2.2 and SMP support. > > > > please help us not to make a mistake in spending money for an expensive > > system. > > > > - g.r. > > > > _________________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com > > > >------------------------------ > >End of AOLSERVER Digest - 7 Jun 1999 to 10 Jun 1999 >*************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 07:08:18 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: "Daniel P. Stasinski" Subject: AOLserveer 3.0 - not open source MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I just noticed that the "Open Source" part has been removed from the Coming Soon notice at www.aolserver.com. Why the sudden retreat? Daniel -- | Daniel P. Stasinski | KareMor International, Inc. | Software Engineer | 2401 South 24th Street | Internet Services Dept. | Phoenix, AZ 85034 | daniels@karemor.com | http://www.karemor.com ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 11:23:00 -0600 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Ron Patterson Organization: MCI WorldCom Subject: AOLserver, Illustra and Y2K... Has anybody done any Y2K testing with AOLserver 2.3+ and Illustra and have any experiences to share? Any info would be appreciated. Ron =============================================================== Ron Patterson | MCI WorldCom (warehouseMCI) Ron.Patterson@wcom.com | 5775 Mark Dabling Blvd. 601-2386@mcimail.com | Dept. 2001/786 719-535-5727 | Colorado Springs, CO 80919 Fax: 719-535-6164 | AOL/IM: RonPDude ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 15 Jun 1999 10:07:12 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Randy Padawer Subject: AOLPress printed docs/book needed In-Reply-To: <199906150405.AAA27912@services.web.aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" AOL recently stopped selling the printed documentation for AOLPress. If someone out there could spare a copy of the book, I would be really happy to pay well for it. Please email me at padawer@m********g.com. (I do understand that the document is available in an Acrobat file, which we have, but I'm still looking for the printed book.) Thanks so much! -- Randy ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 09:31:50 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Brad Chick Subject: Re: AOLSERVER Digest - 14 Jun 1999 to 15 Jun 1999 In-Reply-To: <199906160403.AAA02944@services.web.aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed At 12:03 AM 6/16/99 -0400, you wrote: >There is one message totalling 14 lines in this issue. > >Topics of the day: > > 1. AOLPress printed docs/book needed > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >Date: Tue, 15 Jun 1999 10:07:12 -0400 >From: Randy Padawer >Subject: AOLPress printed docs/book needed > >AOL recently stopped selling the printed documentation for AOLPress. >If someone out there could spare a copy of the book, I would be >really happy to pay well for it. Please email me at >padawer@m********g.com. (I do understand that the document is >available in an Acrobat file, which we have, but I'm still looking >for the printed book.) Thanks so much! >-- Randy You can have ours. Just call the number below: +-------------------------------------------------------------+ | | | o _ _ _ | | _o /\_ _ \\o (_)\__/o (_) | | _< \_ _>(_) (_)/<_ \_| \ _|/' \/ | | (_)>(_) (_) (_) (_) (_)' _\o_ | | --------^ ---^--- ---^--- ------- ----------- | | | +-------------------------------------------------------------+ "Doesn't matter where you finish, as long as it's not behind slow people!" -DoMan Registration Team registration@doitsports.com Do It Sports, Inc. Tel: (734) 998-0007 x26 150 S. Fifth Ave. Fax: (734) 998-0056 Suite C, Ann Arbor, MI 48104 http://www.doitsports.com ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 10:46:17 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Jeff Huber Subject: Re: AOLserver, Illustra and Y2K... MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Informix claims that Illustra Server 3.3x is fully Y2k Complaint (http://www.informix.com/informix/products/year2000/table1.htm). If you got Illustra from AOLserver then you have Illustra 3.2. Informix does not provide Y2k information on 3.2, but I suspect that it is also complaint. Although I do not know why anyone would want to use Illustra. We will be mostly using SQL Server by the Year 2000. To my knowledge, AOL has not realized any official statement saying that AOLserver is Y2k compliant. But it would be kind of hard for them to screw this up. ArsDitia claims that it is Y2k complaint in their Y2k statement (http://www.arsdigita.com/free-tools/year-2000.html) and I think Mark Dalrymple certified the AOLserver codebase as Y2k complaint. Ron Patterson wrote: > > Has anybody done any Y2K testing with AOLserver 2.3+ and Illustra and > have any experiences to share? Any info would be appreciated. > > Ron > =============================================================== > Ron Patterson | MCI WorldCom (warehouseMCI) > Ron.Patterson@wcom.com | 5775 Mark Dabling Blvd. > 601-2386@mcimail.com | Dept. 2001/786 > 719-535-5727 | Colorado Springs, CO 80919 > Fax: 719-535-6164 | AOL/IM: RonPDude -- ---------------------------------------------- | Jeff Huber | Web Applications Developer | | jeff@am.net | AM.net - http://am.net | ---------------------------------------------- ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 10:56:02 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Jeff Huber Subject: Wierd linux problems was Re: linux 6.0 / AOLServer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit We also sometimes have trouble with the Solid driver loading. It didn't start happening until we started running AOLserver out of inittab. It doesn't cause much of a problem because our Database Watchdog automatically restarts AOLserver if it can't execute a sql statement. Usually a restart clears up the problem. Does anyone have anymore information on this problem? Sebastian or Branimir you've played with the driver a lot, have you seen this before? jim@rubylane.com wrote: > > sometimes locks up, creeping memory leaks, and a weird one where > nssolid.so (the AOLServer Solid driver shared library) won't load; it > gives errors about unresolved symbols. I believe this is a Linux > issue, because it is much worse with the 2.2.9 kernel than with > 2.0.36. (I can't get AOLServer 2.3.2 to run reliably on a 2.2.9 > kernel even on a single CPU machine). -- ---------------------------------------------- | Jeff Huber | Web Applications Developer | | jeff@am.net | AM.net - http://am.net | ---------------------------------------------- ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 17:17:55 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Jason Katakura Subject: IRIX Help needed compiling Oracle driver fror AOLserver Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii help! I need help compiling the Oracle 8 driver on SGI IRIX. After compiling and installing NSDP just spews errors. Here's what I did. 1. Installed the latest version of AOLserver 2.3.3 2. Installed Oracle 8.0.5 3. Installed GCC 2.7.2.2, and GNU make from sgi freeware 4. Untarred latest driver from arsdigita.com, No configure script, so I modified the makefile to include the following for IRIX, as follows: ifeq ($(the_uname), IRIX64) PLATFORM = IRIX64 CC = /usr/gnu/bin/gcc LD = ld -ignore_unresolved CFLAGS = -g endif 5. ran gmake, it compiled and linked. 6. installed ora8.so file and reconfigured nsd.ini file 7. started nsdp via nsd-oracle script (making sure oracle enviromental variables set)...and got the following errors. nsd-oracle -i -c nsd.ini [16/Jun/1999:16:33:07 -0700][18451] Warning: Process 18648 killed with signal 9 [16/Jun/1999:16:33:07 -0700][18451] Warning: Process 18690 killed with signal 9 [16/Jun/1999:16:33:07 -0700][18451] Warning: Process 18811 killed with signal 9 [16/Jun/1999:16:33:07 -0700][18451] Warning: Process 18808 killed with signal 9 8. Checking my server.log, tail gives me the following errors.... [16/Jun/1999:16:50:37 -0700][20463] Notice: AOLserver/2.3.3 starting. [16/Jun/1999:16:50:37 -0700][20463.65537] Notice: Loading module: /usr/local/AOLserver/bin/ora8.so *** Exception caught in thread 65537 - invoking exception callbacks *** Server(20463) interrupted - stopping immediately. BTW, I'm using an SGI octane on IRIX 6.5.4. TIA, jason katakura 714-385-6159 ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 12:31:26 +0200 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Sebastian Skracic Subject: Re: AOLSERVER Digest - 15 Jun 1999 to 16 Jun 1999 In-Reply-To: <199906170407.AAA11089@services.web.aol.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII > Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 10:56:02 -0700 > From: Jeff Huber > Subject: Wierd linux problems was Re: linux 6.0 / AOLServer > We also sometimes have trouble with the Solid driver loading. It didn't > start happening until we started running AOLserver out of inittab. It > doesn't cause much of a problem because our Database Watchdog > automatically restarts AOLserver if it can't execute a sql statement. > Usually a restart clears up the problem. Unfortunately I can't be of any help here because I still haven't played with 2.2 kernel. I do all my stuff on 2.0.36, planning to upgrade to 2.0.37 and not bother with 2.2.x until it reaches at least 2.2.30. Anyway, I think there was some discussion on Solid mailing list about kernel 2.2 issues. Try to browse through list archive at: Next, I would try recompiling the driver (it's in examples/c/solid). Seb. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 11:15:22 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: "Kriston J. Rehberg" Subject: Re: AOLserver, Illustra and Y2K... In-Reply-To: <98926916@toto.iv> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jeff Huber writes: >Informix claims that Illustra Server 3.3x is fully Y2k Complaint >(http://www.informix.com/informix/products/year2000/table1.htm). If you >got Illustra from AOLserver then you have Illustra 3.2. Informix does >not provide Y2k information on 3.2, but I suspect that it is also >complaint. Although I do not know why anyone would want to use Illustra. >We will be mostly using SQL Server by the Year 2000. IMHO, there is no real reason for anyone to still use Illustra. The last time I looked into this, Illustra 3.2 was not Y2k compliant. That was the last version AOL had a license to distribute with AS. You might be able to use 3.3x with AS but you'd have to pay for it and it is unknown if that will even work with the current AS driver. Since you'd have to pay for the zombied Illustra product anyway, you'd do better with the robust Sybase driver that comes with AS or the Arsdigita Oracle driver. If you don't want to pay for a commercial database (you /really/ should consider it), the free Postgres database and its driver have come a very long way in just the past three years. And don't forget Solid. About the only thing you won't be able to use is ODBC, which I think rules out MS SQL Server unless they have a non-ODBC unix-like driver now. Even then, I can't think of any reason for hobbling yourself with Windows NT considering the heavy-duty (better) alternatives on Unix such as Oracle and Sybase. Kris -- Kriston J. Rehberg America Online, Inc. http://kriston.net/ ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 01:49:24 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: "R. Matthew Emerson" Subject: Re: IRIX Help needed compiling Oracle driver fror AOLserver Comments: To: Jason.Katakura@experian.com I made AOLserver work with Oracle 8.0.5 and an older version of arsdigita's driver (version 0.6?) at an old job using SGI's C compiler. I don't think that gcc can produce old-style o32 object files. Oracle and AOLserver were o32 binaries, so the oracle driver needs to be o32 also. I set the environment variable SGI_ABI to -32 and linked with the following makefile lines: ora8.so: ora8.o ld -32 -woff 85,134 -shared -o ora8.so ora8.o $(LDFLAGS) $(LIBS) (the -woff flag turns off noisy warnings I didn't want to see.) I also had to redefine the lexpos() macro in ora8.c, since it uses the __FUNCTION__ extension of gcc. I don't know if this helps you any. -matt ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 11:42:51 +0200 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Branimir Dolicki Subject: Re: AOLSERVER Digest - 15 Jun 1999 to 16 Jun 1999 In-Reply-To: <199906170405.AAA11072@services.web.aol.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII > Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 10:56:02 -0700 > From: Jeff Huber > Subject: Wierd linux problems was Re: linux 6.0 / AOLServer > > We also sometimes have trouble with the Solid driver loading. It didn't > start happening until we started running AOLserver out of inittab. It > doesn't cause much of a problem because our Database Watchdog > automatically restarts AOLserver if it can't execute a sql statement. > Usually a restart clears up the problem. > > Does anyone have anymore information on this problem? Sebastian or > Branimir you've played with the driver a lot, have you seen this before? No. That's probably because we are still running kernel 2.0.36. If you don't have a *good* reason to run a newer kernel I would suggest to use this one. -- Branimir ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Jun 1999 08:29:46 EDT Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Ivan Histand Subject: Re: AOLserver, Illustra and Y2K... MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Kriston Rehberg writes: > About the only thing you won't be able to use > is ODBC, which I think rules out MS SQL Server unless they have a > non-ODBC unix-like driver now. The Sybase driver works fine for MSSQL. I have developed numerous applications running on HPUX 10.2, connecting to MSSQL through the AOLServer Sybase driver. In fact, pretty much all software compiled against Sybase open client work fine against MSSQL, on both UNIX and windows clients. This includes the perl Sybase::Dblib and Sybase utilities like isql. We are currently in the process of testing against MSSQL 7, I'll let you know the results. I'm not necessarily recommending this as the architecture of choice, but if you have chosen MSSQL for other reasons, and need to connect via AOLServer, there are no problems that I know of. Ivan Histand America Online ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Jun 1999 10:29:49 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Jeff Huber Subject: Re: AOLserver, Illustra and Y2K... MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Interesting, I'm glad to here this. We've been accessing MSSQL through the ODBC driver with AOLserver 2.1. I'm glad to here that you can access it from the Sybase driver. I'ld like to here your test results working with MSSQL 7. Ivan Histand wrote: > > Kriston Rehberg writes: > > > About the only thing you won't be able to use > > is ODBC, which I think rules out MS SQL Server unless they have a > > non-ODBC unix-like driver now. > > The Sybase driver works fine for MSSQL. I have developed numerous > applications running on HPUX 10.2, connecting to MSSQL through the AOLServer > Sybase driver. In fact, pretty much all software compiled against Sybase > open client work fine against MSSQL, on both UNIX and windows clients. This > includes the perl Sybase::Dblib and Sybase utilities like isql. We are > currently in the process of testing against MSSQL 7, I'll let you know the > results. I'm not necessarily recommending this as the architecture of > choice, but if you have chosen MSSQL for other reasons, and need to connect > via AOLServer, there are no problems that I know of. > > Ivan Histand > America Online -- ---------------------------------------------- | Jeff Huber | Web Applications Developer | | jeff@am.net | AM.net - http://am.net | ---------------------------------------------- ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Jun 1999 09:10:00 -0600 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Ron Patterson Organization: MCI WorldCom Subject: Re: AOLserver, Illustra and Y2K... You know, you ask a relatively simple question about some testing issues with Y2K and all you get is slammed for using Illustra at all. Well, we have been using Illustra for years now and it continues to work quite well. We have had very few problems with it compared to the problems I've seen with Oracle, Sybase, and Informix. A lot of these problems have reared their ugly little heads on this list. We have one person supporting the Illustra database and used Informix/Illustra support almost nil. I doubt many other database users could make that claim. This is not to say that we haven't had our problems but most of them have been pretty small and easy to work around or just re-implement a better way. We've done some preliminary Y2K with the Illustra engine and all has gone quite well. Illustra has always required fully formatted dates and the date calculations appear to be performing correctly. We've been pretty happy with AOLserver itself, love the embedded Tcl language and database support, but based on the nearly useless responses from this list and the mostly non-exsistent support from AOL I believe will be looking for a replace real soon now, and no it probably will not be Netscape or MS. Regards, Ron =============================================================== Ron Patterson | MCI WorldCom (warehouseMCI) Ron.Patterson@wcom.com | 5775 Mark Dabling Blvd. 601-2386@mcimail.com | Dept. 2001/786 719-535-5727 | Colorado Springs, CO 80919 Fax: 719-535-6164 | AOL/IM: RonPDude ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Jun 1999 12:49:47 -0500 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: "J. Michael Roberts" Subject: Re: AOLserver, Illustra and Y2K... In-Reply-To: <19990618151052.SUFU20950@localHost> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Ha!! This was entertaining reading! We're using AOLserver/Illustra, too, at http://www.techspex.com -- and never once had a problem. Even sans Y2K statement, I'm confident that we're OK for the millenium. As regards Illustra, I'm just not comfortable with the licensing/support situation as a general principle, and we will more than likely be moving off Illustra onto MS SQLServer, not because that's a better database choice, but because it's already there in the environment and we have support people for it. The only problem with Illustra is the lack of support, code, documentation, and tuning capabilities. It's run for two years with nary a problem, and that's more than I can say for M$ products in my past experience. Ron, one thing you have to remember about the quality of response on this group is that *not many people use AOLserver* -- so not many people are going to have an answer to your question, unless they've happened to do said testing themselves. And since most AOLserver people have slowly gotten off Illustra since Illustra's sale to Informix, well, sorry, but that's just life. I will say that in the past couple of months there's been a slight resurgence of life on this list. Ah well. My two bits. I'd be interested in hearing about your choice of replacement and your experiences in switching, if it comes to that. Michael On Fri, 18 Jun 1999, Ron Patterson wrote: > You know, you ask a relatively simple question about some testing > issues with Y2K and all you get is slammed for using Illustra at all. > Well, we have been using Illustra for years now and it continues to > work quite well. We have had very few problems with it compared to the > problems I've seen with Oracle, Sybase, and Informix. A lot of these > problems have reared their ugly little heads on this list. We have one > person supporting the Illustra database and used Informix/Illustra > support almost nil. I doubt many other database users could make that > claim. This is not to say that we haven't had our problems but most of > them have been pretty small and easy to work around or just > re-implement a better way. > > We've done some preliminary Y2K with the Illustra engine and all has > gone quite well. Illustra has always required fully formatted dates > and the date calculations appear to be performing correctly. > > We've been pretty happy with AOLserver itself, love the embedded Tcl > language and database support, but based on the nearly useless > responses from this list and the mostly non-exsistent support from AOL > I believe will be looking for a replace real soon now, and no it > probably will not be Netscape or MS. > > Regards, > Ron > =============================================================== > Ron Patterson | MCI WorldCom (warehouseMCI) > Ron.Patterson@wcom.com | 5775 Mark Dabling Blvd. > 601-2386@mcimail.com | Dept. 2001/786 > 719-535-5727 | Colorado Springs, CO 80919 > Fax: 719-535-6164 | AOL/IM: RonPDude > ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 19 Jun 1999 16:58:03 -0000 Reply-To: markd@arsdigita.com Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Mark Dalrymple Subject: Re: AOLserver, Illustra and Y2K... In-Reply-To: <199906170408.AAA11096@services.web.aol.com> (message from Automatic digest processor on Thu, 17 Jun 1999 00:03:03 -0400) > To my knowledge, AOL has not realized any official statement saying that > AOLserver is Y2k compliant. This is the blurb I used to send to anyone who asked. There are a couple of minor Y2k issues in AOLServer 2.2.1 and earlier which may or may not be problems for you: * The timestamps used in headers like If-Modified-Since is of the format 'Thursday, 10-Jun-93 01:29:59 GMT' * The timestamps used in 'fancy' directory listings uses a 2-digit year (cosmetic) * When log files are rolled with a date format, it uses a 2-digit year All of these have been fixed for AOLServer 2.3. [we did do review of the code relating to date handling, so things should be groovy] ++Mark Dalrymple, ArsDigita "Spoon. Most ancient of tools. First among utensils to dish up food, fun, and trouble. Ohhhhh Buddy Spoon. Now you are in SpoonMan's corner. Good work. Now you are in SpoonMan's dreams. Good luck." -- SpoonMan ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 19 Jun 1999 17:02:47 -0000 Reply-To: markd@arsdigita.com Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Mark Dalrymple Subject: Re: IRIX Help needed compiling Oracle driver fror AOLserver In-Reply-To: <199906170408.AAA11096@services.web.aol.com> (message from Automatic digest processor on Thu, 17 Jun 1999 00:03:03 -0400) > [16/Jun/1999:16:50:37 -0700][20463.65537] Notice: > Loading module: /usr/local/AOLserver/bin/ora8.so > *** Exception caught in thread 65537 - invoking > exception callbacks *** Double-check your nsd.ini and make sure the stacksize setting is set. ++Mark Dalrymple, ArsDigita. markd@arsdigita.com "When I grow up, I wanna be the guy that names nail polish colors." -- Gray Jones ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1999 20:39:34 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Colin Summers Subject: Choosing an SQL server Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Hello, I am setting up a small installation. Tiny. Mostly to fool around on and prototype an idea on. I read Greenspun's book and I am a convert. So a systems integrator is putting together a Linux box for me with AOLServer installed. RedHat comes with Postgres installed, but I have heard other people like MySQL. I don't have the money for Oracle, and I don't need that kind of performance. I will primarily be archiving email and tracking users with the SQL end, so I need varchar(2048) or something like it (I assume in the lower end SQL there are no BLOBs or large text objects). What do people like? Thanks, --Colin ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1999 21:18:10 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Herbert Samuels Organization: Pure Source Subject: SSL module for AOLServer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I've been trying to get the ssl module for the aolserver 2.3 for awhiile now, but I've had no response from AOL to my inquiries. I read somewhere about placing nsssl=nsssle.so in nsd.ini, but beyond this I don't have anymore information. How does one get the module (if AOL still has to send it to us), and if nsssle.so is in fact to be used, how do you configure it? Any docs anywhere? Thanks in advance. herbert samuels pure source world media hsamuels@puresource.com http://www.puresource.com tel: 718.922.1371 fax: 718.922.1490 ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1999 23:03:36 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Jeff Huber Subject: Re: SSL module for AOLServer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Placing the line nsssl=nsssle.so in your ns/server/vserver/modules section will tell your virtual server to use the 40-bit SSL module. You can then configure it by going to the /NS/Admin pages of your virtual server. Or you can do everything by using the Setup Server; see http://www.aolserver.com/server/docs/2.3/html/ssl3.htm#29815. AOL use to mail out the 128-bit SSL module. I don't think they still do...not sure though. Herbert Samuels wrote: > > I've been trying to get the ssl module for the aolserver 2.3 for awhiile > now, but I've had no response from AOL to my inquiries. > I read somewhere about placing nsssl=nsssle.so in nsd.ini, but beyond > this I don't have anymore information. > How does one get the module (if AOL still has to send it to us), and if > nsssle.so is in fact to be used, how do you configure it? Any docs > anywhere? > > Thanks in advance. > > herbert samuels pure source world media > hsamuels@puresource.com http://www.puresource.com > tel: 718.922.1371 fax: 718.922.1490 -- ---------------------------------------------- | Jeff Huber | Web Applications Developer | | jeff@am.net | AM.net - http://am.net | ---------------------------------------------- ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 11:29:04 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: "Kriston J. Rehberg" Subject: Re: AOLserver, Illustra and Y2K... In-Reply-To: <64882031@toto.iv> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I'm glad not everyone thinks there have been "nearly useless responses from this list." The question was whether Illustra 3.2, the free distribution for AOLserver users, is Y2K-compliant. The answer is a probable "no" for the free 3.2 version but a "yes" for the NON-FREE 3.3+ versions. If you like Illustra and want support, you have to pay for a subsequent release of a database that looks like its on its last leg with the new owner, Informix. As an extension to this answer, consider dumping your tables and moving them to Sybase, Oracle, MS SQL Server, Solid, or Postgres. That looks, to me, like a plethora of viable commercial and non-commercial alternatives that perfectly suit the needs of anyone, large or small, who uses AOLserver, on any platform. ObTrivia: Did you know that Postgres grew out of the same family of databases that Illustra grew out of? Since Postgres is free for any purpose, I think it's worth considering if you are an Illustra 3.2 user, which AOL has not been distributing for at least a couple of years now. Kris -- Kriston J. Rehberg America Online, Inc. http://kriston.net/ ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 06:09:29 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: jim@rubylane.com Subject: Re: Choosing an SQL server Comments: cc: colin@mail.flashcom.net.criticalpath.net In-Reply-To: <199906210359.XAA07289@services.web.aol.com> from "Colin Summers" at Jun 20, 99 08:39:34 pm Content-Type: text We're using Solid - www.solidtech.com. It does everything and is relatively inexpensive, or used to be. There is a driver already in AOLServer for Solid. None for MySQL that I know of... (although if someone has one, please let me know!) Jim > > Hello, > > I am setting up a small installation. Tiny. Mostly to fool around on and > prototype an idea on. > > I read Greenspun's book and I am a convert. So a systems integrator is > putting together a Linux box for me with AOLServer installed. > > RedHat comes with Postgres installed, but I have heard other people like > MySQL. I don't have the money for Oracle, and I don't need that kind of > performance. I will primarily be archiving email and tracking users with > the SQL end, so I need varchar(2048) or something like it (I assume in > the lower end SQL there are no BLOBs or large text objects). > > What do people like? > > Thanks, > --Colin > ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 03:42:49 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Thomas Degremont Subject: Re: Choosing an SQL server In-Reply-To: <199906210359.XAA07289@services.web.aol.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit You will be surprised at home much the "lower end" sql servers can do. I would definately recommend MySQL for fooling around (many people do alot more with it) - I know that a few people have worked on a MySQL driver for aolserver, although i have not seen it released to the public anywhere. Would be nice, and a killer combination for uses like yours. Tom -----Original Message----- From: Web Development with AOLserver [mailto:AOLSERVER@SERVICES.WEB.AOL.COM]On Behalf Of Colin Summers Sent: Sunday, June 20, 1999 11:40 PM To: Multiple recipients of list AOLSERVER Subject: Choosing an SQL server Hello, I am setting up a small installation. Tiny. Mostly to fool around on and prototype an idea on. I read Greenspun's book and I am a convert. So a systems integrator is putting together a Linux box for me with AOLServer installed. RedHat comes with Postgres installed, but I have heard other people like MySQL. I don't have the money for Oracle, and I don't need that kind of performance. I will primarily be archiving email and tracking users with the SQL end, so I need varchar(2048) or something like it (I assume in the lower end SQL there are no BLOBs or large text objects). What do people like? Thanks, --Colin ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 22:13:34 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Colin Summers Subject: Newbie Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Is there a beginner's tutorial on AOLServer somewhere? Something that might have an example, for instance, on cookie-ing a browser, or switching to SSL, opening the database to grab a stored page, that sort of thing? Thanks, --Colin ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 22:15:38 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Colin Summers Subject: My SQL Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Does anyone out there use MySQL with AOLServer (and therefore have a driver written for AOLServer? Thanks, --Colin ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 13:45:43 +0800 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Brian Baquiran Organization: Evoserve Subject: Re: AOLSERVER Digest - 19 Jun 1999 to 21 Jun 1999 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Automatic digest processor wrote: > Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1999 20:39:34 -0700 > From: Colin Summers > Subject: Choosing an SQL server > > I read Greenspun's book and I am a convert. So a systems integrator is > putting together a Linux box for me with AOLServer installed. I wonder how many AOLserver converts got their start at Philip's pages? > RedHat comes with Postgres installed, but I have heard other people like > MySQL. I don't have the money for Oracle, and I don't need that kind of > performance. I will primarily be archiving email and tracking users with > the SQL end, so I need varchar(2048) or something like it (I assume in > the lower end SQL there are no BLOBs or large text objects). If you've already got Postgres, I suggest you stick with that. I'm currently using a 6.4 version, but 6.5 came out just last week and it looks good. I will try it out on a new system soon. It does have BLOBs, but I haven't tried them because there doesn't seem to be an easy way to get them in and out via AOLserver. Tuples are ~8K anyway, so most email messages will fit. If you want to try free, non-Open-Source databases, Sebastian Skracic has written an external Interbase driver. There's a driver for Sybase, which is free on Linux as well. MySQL doesn't have AOLserver drivers, so is useless unless you want to write CGI scripts to get your data in and out. > What do people like? What I'd LIKE is for Oracle to be Open Source, and install easily on any Linux distribution, and not just Red Hat. Brian -- brianb@evoserve.com http://www.baquiran.com US Fax: (603) 908-0727 ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 22:51:56 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Jeff Huber Subject: Re: Newbie MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit There is a bunch of examples/tutorial at http://www.aolserver.com/server/docs/2.3/html/tlib-ch8.htm#13759. Colin Summers wrote: > > Is there a beginner's tutorial on AOLServer somewhere? > > Something that might have an example, for instance, on cookie-ing a > browser, or switching to SSL, opening the database to grab a stored page, > that sort of thing? > > Thanks, > --Colin -- ---------------------------------------------- | Jeff Huber | Web Applications Developer | | jeff@am.net | AM.net - http://am.net | ---------------------------------------------- ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 01:34:11 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Herbert Samuels Organization: Pure Source Subject: SSL Configuration MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi All, Thanks for all the suggestions. I have in fact tried the the steps outlined for setting the AOLServer to use nsssle.so, but when I set the configuration to look at nsssle.so and then go to the configuration page for that module, I'm not presented with any opportunity to set the cert file, key file, etc. In Basic editing mode I'm presented with no input fields whatsoever, and in Expert mode I receive the prompt "Additional Parameters" along with six empty text input fields, but that's all. This is what made me think that maybe I was missing a step somewhere. I'm on Redhat 5.2 with AOLServer 2.3.3 Any thoughts are much appreciated! Herbert Samuels ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 23:02:03 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Jeff Huber Subject: Re: SSL Configuration MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit That's odd. Can we see your nsd.ini? Make sure to remove all passwords before posting it to the list. Herbert Samuels wrote: > > Hi All, > > Thanks for all the suggestions. > > I have in fact tried the the steps outlined for setting the AOLServer to > use nsssle.so, but when I set the configuration to look at nsssle.so and > then go to the configuration page for that module, I'm not presented > with any opportunity to set the cert file, key file, etc. > In Basic editing mode I'm presented with no input fields whatsoever, and > in Expert mode I receive the prompt "Additional Parameters" along with > six empty text input fields, but that's all. > This is what made me think that maybe I was missing a step somewhere. > I'm on Redhat 5.2 with AOLServer 2.3.3 > > Any thoughts are much appreciated! > > Herbert Samuels -- ---------------------------------------------- | Jeff Huber | Web Applications Developer | | jeff@am.net | AM.net - http://am.net | ---------------------------------------------- ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 14:33:42 +0200 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Bas Scheffers Subject: Re: Choosing an SQL server In-Reply-To: <199906220341.FAA31112@s025.widexs.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 12:01 AM 6/22/99 -0400, you wrote: >RedHat comes with Postgres installed, but I have heard other people like >MySQL. I don't have the money for Oracle, and I don't need that kind of >performance. I will primarily be archiving email and tracking users with >the SQL end, so I need varchar(2048) or something like it (I assume in >the lower end SQL there are no BLOBs or large text objects). There's only three free databases for AOL Server on linux: Postgres, Sybase 11.0.3 and Interbase 4. I only have experience with the first two: postgres IMHO sucks, although there are some happy users out there and the thing seems to get better with every release. I use Sybase myself, it's fast it's reliable and and keeps you up at night reading 'Sybase Unleashed', but that's OK because if you were using oracle it would keep you up even more nights reading even more books. (As Philip puts it: al the books he recomends and then some). If you have some interesting hardware, CLOBs needn't be as much of a problem, especialy under low loads. I would certainly recomend Sybase, just because of it's proven reliability compared to the other free stuff and the features it comes with. This is after all an enterprise class database and if hospitals, banks and insurence companies can trust it with their data, so can I. And you'd see none of those using Postgres or MySQL... Happy hacking, Bas. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 13:41:48 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Lamar Owen Subject: Re: PostgreSQL and AOLserver MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit > > Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1999 20:39:34 -0700 > From: Colin Summers > Subject: Choosing an SQL server > > RedHat comes with Postgres installed, but I have heard other people like > MySQL. I don't have the money for Oracle, and I don't need that kind of > performance. I will primarily be archiving email and tracking users with > the SQL end, so I need varchar(2048) or something like it (I assume in > the lower end SQL there are no BLOBs or large text objects). For the purposes you are desiring, Postgres is a good fit. As long as you keep in mind that a tuple (record) is limited to a total of 8192 byes, you will be fine. Under postgres, varchar(2048) works fine -- or, simply use the type of text. There is a large object interface, but it is pretty clunky. PostgreSQL is not the fastest, but is by far the most capable of the open-source RDBMS's, and is ideal for fooling around on. MySQL is not really an option for use with AOLserver, as there is not yet a MySQL driver available. To get PostgreSQL working with AOLserver, you will need to rebuild the postgres.so module -- if you will send a private e-mail to me at lowen@citcom.net, I'll send you the Makefile you will need. Next, set up a database pool under AOLserver, using the postgres driver, and connecting to a datasource of host:port:database, where host is your hostname, port is usually 5432, and database is the name of the database you want to connect to. Connect as user aolserver. Now, you need to edit the file /etc/rc.d/init.d/postgresql to include the "-i" option to postmaster (find the line starting with "su -c ", go over past the postmaster item, and insert -i). If postmaster was running, restart it. If you have a recent RedHat (5.2 or 6.0), you may find that there is no database created. So, you need to issue the command, as user postgres, "initdb --pglib=/usr/lib/pgsql --pgdata=/var/lib/pgsql". Then, start postmaster ( as root, "/etc/rc.d/init.d/postgresql start"). Now, you need to do a creatuser aolserver, and a createdb whatever-you-want-to-call-your-db. Finally, restart AOLserver. In initial startup, you want to make sure that postmaster is started BEFORE AOLserver. Also, as an aside, PostgreSQL is Y2K compliant. I am very happy with the AOLserver/PostgreSQL combo -- with version 6.5 released, I am sure I will be happier, as 6.5 puts it into the big leagues with a locking system that is faster and better than row-locking. I have used it since the 6.1 days, when it was pretty creaky, about two years ago. 6.4.2 is very stable, and very reliable. Check www.postgresql.org for more info and documentation. Lamar Owen WGCR Internet Radio ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 23 Jun 1999 01:05:51 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Herbert Samuels Organization: Pure Source Subject: SSL Configuration MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jeff, I compared the nsd.ini on the server I'm trying to install the ssl module on with the nsd.ini from a colleague's server which had the nssl module installed. I found the nsssl section and copied them into my nsd.ini, specifying my information where appropriate, and found that now the module is functioning, and the configuration options, of course, now show up in the expert mode of the setup page for the nsssl module. Added tje following section: [ns/server/ververname/module/nsssl] ListenBackLog=128 Port=443 Address=xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx Hostname=www.domain-name.com CertFile=/path/to/certfile KeyFile=/path/to/keyfile I wonder why the addition of the module via the admin interface didn't cause the section to be added automatically, but am glad it works now. I've experienced this with two different installations of RedHat 5.2 (2.0.34 kernel) and AOLServer 2.3.3. Thanks for all the suggestions. Herbert Samuels ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 22:08:32 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Robert Locke Subject: SSL Configuration Comments: cc: hsamuels@puresource.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > In Basic editing mode I'm presented with no input fields whatsoever, > and > in Expert mode I receive the prompt "Additional Parameters" along with > six empty text input fields, but that's all. Use the blank key-value fields in Expert Mode to manually add the CertFile and KeyFile. I think you would add CertFile /usr/local/aolserver/.../cert.pem KeyFile /usr/local/aolserver/.../key.pem But first, you need to generate a key pair, submit a certificate request, and get a certificate. This is all done from the "Secure Socket Layer Control" link accessible from /NS/Admin. Good luck! Rob Locke ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 23 Jun 1999 10:38:38 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Jeff Huber Subject: Re: SSL Configuration MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I'm glad you go it working also. I've never actually tried adding the module via the admin interface, I also do it manually. Herbert Samuels wrote: > > > > I wonder why the addition of the module via the admin interface didn't > cause the section to be added automatically, but am glad it works now. > I've experienced this with two different installations of RedHat 5.2 > (2.0.34 kernel) and AOLServer 2.3.3. > > Thanks for all the suggestions. > > Herbert Samuels -- ---------------------------------------------- | Jeff Huber | Web Applications Developer | | jeff@am.net | AM.net - http://am.net | ---------------------------------------------- ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 23 Jun 1999 18:13:40 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Jeff Huber Subject: AOLserver Version 3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit For those who haven't figured out how to hack off the the urls on AOLserver's Website, the AOLserver version 3.0 documentation is available at http://www.aolserver.com/server/docs/3.0/html/toc.htm. Check out the "New Features" page. Lets see.... - Virtual Servers no longer supported - SSL no longer supported (although they say the module will be re-implemented later) - Java Servlet API no longer supported - FTP no longer supported - aliases no longer supported: - Network logging no longer supported - AOLpress support removed - Extended table features no longer supported - In general all /NS/Db/* stuff no longer supported ...and here is the best part... The Setup Server and /NS/Admin pages have been removed. Now all configuration is done via a "telnet control port". We're moving from http to telnet. Wow, what an improvement! I'm so excited I'm going to go have a piece of layer cake! I suspect a lot of code was removed because AOL didn't want it to become Open Source. They also have a link to the "AOLserver Public Licensee" (http://www.aolserver.com/server/docs/3.0/html/license.htm) which doesn't quite make since to me. But it appears that AOLserver will be using a GPL style license (true Open Source). Which is a good thing. On a good note, AOLserver now supports Tcl 7.6 instead of 7.4. What I really found the most interesting though was the change in the Tcl Interpreters. Correct me if I'm reading this wrong, but now if you want to re-source a Tcl file you have to restart the server. (See http://www.aolserver.com/server/docs/3.0/html/tgen-ch1.htm#15218). I must be missing something. -- ---------------------------------------------- | Jeff Huber | Web Applications Developer | | jeff@am.net | AM.net - http://am.net | ---------------------------------------------- ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 23 Jun 1999 18:28:27 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: "John D. Mitchell" Subject: AOLserver Version 3.0 In-Reply-To: <37718644.DFECE719@am.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >>>>> "Jeff" == Jeff Huber writes: > For those who haven't figured out how to hack off the the urls on > AOLserver's Website, the AOLserver version 3.0 documentation is available > at http://www.aolserver.com/server/docs/3.0/html/toc.htm. > Check out the "New Features" page. Lets see.... [...Lots of missing features...] Gee, that's completely retarded! AOLServer, RIP. John ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 23 Jun 1999 21:44:36 -0500 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: "J. Michael Roberts" Subject: Re: AOLserver Version 3.0 In-Reply-To: <37718644.DFECE719@am.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII > For those who haven't figured out how to hack off the the urls on > AOLserver's Website and for those to whom it simply never occurred... By the way, thanks! > Check out the "New Features" page. Lets see.... Or as I'll be referring to it, the "Lack of New Features" -- or maybe the "New Antifeatures"? -- page... > I suspect a lot of code was removed because AOL didn't want it to become > Open Source. I'd have to agree. My guess is their original purchase didn't allow it, or possibly the missing modules are themselves based on purchased code. > They also have a link to the "AOLserver Public Licensee" > (http://www.aolserver.com/server/docs/3.0/html/license.htm) which > doesn't quite make since to me. Maybe because the actual license is at MIT and not actually there yet... > On a good note, AOLserver now supports Tcl 7.6 instead of 7.4. What I > really found the most interesting though was the change in the Tcl > Interpreters. Correct me if I'm reading this wrong, but now if you want > to re-source a Tcl file you have to restart the server. Man. That sure is how it reads, isn't it? Well. We can fix that. Because: IT WILL BE OPEN SOURCE!!!! Calloo, callay! I'm so pumped about this! Boy am I glad I never upgraded past 2.1 -- I won't be missing a lot of the now-you-see-them-now-you-don't features. I don't suppose anybody has heard any rumors about a possible release date? No, I didn't think you had. Sigh. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 23 Jun 1999 21:45:22 -0500 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: "J. Michael Roberts" Subject: Re: AOLserver Version 3.0 In-Reply-To: <14193.35259.282072.559032@non.non.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII > > Check out the "New Features" page. Lets see.... > [...Lots of missing features...] > > Gee, that's completely retarded! Yeah, I'd have to go along with that. > AOLServer, RIP. I hope not. Not if I can help it. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 00:20:21 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Patrick Giagnocavo Subject: Re: AOLserver Version 3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > From: Jeff Huber > Subject: AOLserver Version 3.0 > > Check out the "New Features" page. Lets see.... > > - Virtual Servers no longer supported I got the impression that Vservers were available but implemented rather differently. By Vservers I mean there is not a separate IP addr, you look at the HTTP 1.1 Host: header to determine which pages to serve. > The Setup Server and /NS/Admin pages have been removed. Now all > configuration is done via a "telnet control port". We're moving from > http to telnet. Wow, what an improvement! I'm so excited I'm going to go > have a piece of layer cake! What, you weren't using lynx to configure the server anyways??? > I suspect a lot of code was removed because AOL didn't want it to become > Open Source. They also have a link to the "AOLserver Public Licensee" > (http://www.aolserver.com/server/docs/3.0/html/license.htm) which > doesn't quite make since to me. But it appears that AOLserver will be > using a GPL style license (true Open Source). Which is a good thing. This is disappointing. However the basics are still there. > On a good note, AOLserver now supports Tcl 7.6 instead of 7.4. What Even better is that if the source is truly available, we can RIP OUT 7.6 and stick in 8.x instead. Also, adding Perl5 support would get a lot more users, and you could immed. use a lot of Perl CGIs and immediately get greatly increased performance. Maybe someone from MIT will also add integrated Common Lisp support ;-) Oh well, just keep that archive copy of v2.3.3 around... Cordially ./patrick ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 01:29:33 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Patrick Giagnocavo Subject: Max number of Virtual Hosts under v2.3.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit It seems that Vservers will be changing under v3.0, but since that might not be rock-solid for a few months I will stick with v2.3.3. I am in the midst of setting up some virtual hosting for some clients. I have the ability to add a few more low end, static sites to the same system (customers don't care what the server is). Low-maintenance, low traffic, personal pages for local non-profits. Has anyone bumped into the max. number of virtual hosts? I don't want to do anything to interfere with others on the server... At first I thought it might be equal to the number of file descriptors or something like that, but then realized that the internal nssock connection between servers is probably only open for a brief period of time, so that isn't it. MAX_FD or whatever is 256 under Linux, so that would mean 256 concurrent accesses, ie 256 threads, which is a LOT of hits (ie I will never reach this). I am running Linux RedHat v5.2, with the 2.2.10 kernel (which BTW is much much faster on cached filesystem access, on the order of 3x on my system over 2.0.36). Anyone know for sure? Cordially ./patrick ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 09:43:41 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: "Peter J. Lim" Subject: Re: AOLSERVER 3 In-Reply-To: <199906240401.AAA17744@services.web.aol.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII > > Check out the "New Features" page. Lets see.... > [...Lots of missing features...] > > Gee, that's completely retarded! > > AOLServer, RIP. > I agree completely! The very reasons that I started using AOLServer and continue to do so (despite pressure from higher-up muckity-mucks who wanted me to change servers so they could "support" it) are now being removed from AOLServer. These features include: - FTP module - Web administration - AOLpress (it's actually a good, basic web editor, and it's great for making quick changes over the web, instead of FTPing files back and forth) - DB support & creation through a web interface It looks likes I'll just continue running my older version of AOLServer for a while longer until I'm forced to switch. AOLServer guys -- reconsider these decisions! Peter Lim Ohio University Eastern ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 10:31:00 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Dominic Tracey Subject: Re: AOLSERVER Digest - 22 Jun 1999 to 23 Jun 1999 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I think the license file is supposed to be read as if it was attached to a patch that you have written for the code base. Since you by default own the copyright to your additions you get to choose the license you want, either the GPL or the one behind the aolserver.lcs.mit.edu curtain. I'm psyched to see the domain name - will rms be behind the curtain proudly holding the new license that he has sprinkled with holy gnu pee? With the spate of "open source" releases that have been roundly jeered by the open source community (notably, and perhaps not deservedly, Apple's) it would certainly be a wise move to go to the man himself and bypass the pretenders to the throne such as Eric Raymond and Bruce Perens. Certainly it is quite shocking the amount of excluded features. I wonder if there are third party licensing concerns or security issues behind these ommisions? Any one of these ommisions would provide a good reason not to move to 3.0 and yet they provide a whole list! D > I suspect a lot of code was removed because AOL didn't want it to become > Open Source. They also have a link to the "AOLserver Public Licensee" > (http://www.aolserver.com/server/docs/3.0/html/license.htm) which > doesn't quite make since to me. But it appears that AOLserver will be > using a GPL style license (true Open Source). Which is a good thing. > > > Check out the "New Features" page. Lets see.... > [...Lots of missing features...] > > Gee, that's completely retarded! > > AOLServer, RIP. > > John > > ------------------------------ > > End of AOLSERVER Digest - 22 Jun 1999 to 23 Jun 1999 > **************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 13:47:45 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: "Peter M. Jansson" Subject: Re: AOLSERVER 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit A lot of the stuff could be being removed in order to make the footprint smaller. This would allow multiple AOLservers for virtual servers, which is a security plus. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 11:14:28 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Hal Heisler Subject: Re: AOLserver Version 3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jeff Huber wrote: > For those who haven't figured out how to hack off the the urls on > AOLserver's Website, the AOLserver version 3.0 documentation is > available at http://www.aolserver.com/server/docs/3.0/html/toc.htm. > > Restrictive permissions were set for the 3.0 docs url while I was reading it. I guess that means the development team reads these messages. No java support? too bad. .hal ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 14:59:15 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Lamar Owen Subject: AOLserver 3.0 MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit > >>>>> "Jeff" == Jeff Huber writes: > > For those who haven't figured out how to hack off the the urls on > > AOLserver's Website, the AOLserver version 3.0 documentation is available > > at http://www.aolserver.com/server/docs/3.0/html/toc.htm. > > > Check out the "New Features" page. Lets see.... > [...Lots of missing features...] > > Gee, that's completely retarded! > > AOLServer, RIP. > > John Please, please, please don't flame AOL over this -- after all, we are getting basically what we want -- source code to AOLserver. They have license agreements that they had to honor as well -- the SSL stuff, for instance. Although, most of the other stuff in Jeff's message (the AOLserver site seems to be locked down right now for the docs -- unless someone wants to post the username/password pair needed to access the docs), seems to be stuff that is implemented in tcl in 2.3.x. So, what you do is keep you 2.3.3 around for the tcl stuff (the admin pages, the database pages, et al (even ns_buildsqldate, etc)), and integrate it into you 3.0 installation. It shouldn't take long for someone to integrate SSLeay into the server -- when that happens, "we'll be cooking with gas!" If it was coded once under a proprietary license, it can be coded again on an open license. I for one am looking forward to rolling up my shirt sleeves and getting my hands dirty reimplementing some things. While I probably won't immediately abandon 2.3.3 (as long as it still runs on whatever platform I am using at that time), but I certainly will look towards migrating to 3. Lamar Owen WGCR Internet Radio AOLserver fanatic. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 16:15:24 -0500 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: "J. Michael Roberts" Subject: Re: AOLserver Version 3.0 In-Reply-To: <37727584.64C87FA1@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Oh, *we'll* get Java support running again. Never you fear! On Thu, 24 Jun 1999, Hal Heisler wrote: > Jeff Huber wrote: > > > For those who haven't figured out how to hack off the the urls on > > AOLserver's Website, the AOLserver version 3.0 documentation is > > available at http://www.aolserver.com/server/docs/3.0/html/toc.htm. > > > > > > Restrictive permissions were set for the 3.0 docs url while I was reading > it. > I guess that means the development team reads these messages. > > > No java support? too bad. > > .hal > ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 22:24:53 -0400 Reply-To: philg@mit.edu Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Philip Greenspun Subject: speculation on why AOL ripped out so much stuff It is fun to speculate on why AOL ripped out so much stuff from 3.0. Here are my favorites from recent mailing list: features. I wonder if there are third party licensing concerns or security issues behind these ommisions? Any one of these ommisions would provide a good reason not to move to 3.0 and yet they provide a whole list! > I suspect a lot of code was removed because AOL didn't want it to become > Open Source. I've been working with AOL since December to open-source the thing. The truth is much simpler than some of you guys might suppose: 1) they waited for 3.0 to open source the server because they were a bit embarrassed by some of the cruft that had accumulated over four years in Navi/GNN/AOLserver 2) they ripped out a bunch of features because (a) they don't use them on AOL's high-volume sites (like DigitalCity), (b) they complicate maintenance and extension of the server code base, and (c) they think they could be done in modules outside of the server core This is actually pretty common in the world of complex software. It eventually gets too complex for anyone to understand so people do a leaner meaner rewrite. Don't cry too hard for your lost feature bloat. Be assured that four years from now AOLserver will be just as bloated with new and even weirder features. I also know that AOL itself is working on making Tcl 8.1 part of the server. They just couldn't get it done in time and sensibly decided to release an improvement. Jim Davidson, the original NaviServer architect, worked a lot on 3.0. He is a tasteful thoughtful guy and 3.0 is the best Web server for his needs (i.e., heavy and reliable support for Tcl, databases, ADP; clean and fast static file serving; easy configuration). Philip ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 25 Jun 1999 00:10:00 -0500 Reply-To: kclark@ntlug.org Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Kendall Clark Subject: AOLSERVER 3.0 and Python MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Along with upgrading to TCL 8, I'd really, really like to see Python get embedded into OpenAOLServer. TCL is good, but I think Python[1] is better, and it's nearly as ideal for embedding. Just my 2 cents. I'm looking forward to upgrading from Apache. :> Best, Kendall Clark, The Casbah Project http://casbah.org Footnotes: [1] In case you've been living under a rock, . :> -- "The mind of Man is fram'd even like the breath / And harmony of music. There is a dark / Invisible workmanship that reconciles / Discordant elements, and makes them move / In one society. Ah me! that all / The terrors, all the early miseries[,] / Regrets, vexations, lassitudes, that all / The thoughts and feelings which have been infus'd / Into my mind, should ever have made up / The calm existence that is mine when I / Am worthy of myself!" (Wordsworth, 1805 _Prel._ 1.351-61) ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 23:56:13 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: "John D. Mitchell" Subject: AOLserver 3.0 In-Reply-To: <37728003.48168233@wgcr.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >>>>> "Lamar" == Lamar Owen writes: >>>>>>> "Jeff" == Jeff Huber writes: [...] > Please, please, please don't flame AOL over this -- after all, we are > getting basically what we want -- source code to AOLserver. Why not? Are we supposed to keep quiet about the emperor's nakedness just because he gives the patterns for his designs away for nothing? > They have license agreements that they had to honor as well -- the SSL > stuff, for instance. I can believe the SSL stuff due to all the weird RSA and export licensing restrictions -- but the rest? Let's just say that I'm extremely skeptical. [...] > If it was coded once under a proprietary license, it can be coded again > on an open license. I for one am looking forward to rolling up my shirt > sleeves and getting my hands dirty reimplementing some things. While I > probably won't immediately abandon 2.3.3 (as long as it still runs on > whatever platform I am using at that time), but I certainly will look > towards migrating to 3. Blech! If we're going to have to go to so much trouble, why not refactor the design and take a fresh take at the implementation? Oh well, I'll shut up now. Take care, John ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 25 Jun 1999 10:37:19 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: "Kriston J. Rehberg" Subject: Re: AOLserver Version 3.0 In-Reply-To: <49307500@toto.iv> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >I got the impression that Vservers were available but implemented >rather differently. By Vservers I mean there is not a separate IP >addr, you look at the HTTP 1.1 Host: header to determine which pages >to serve. The "Host" header to AOLserver is virtual hosting (nsvhost.so in older versions) and is not the same as "virtual servers." Virtual servers refers to the method by which you have multiple IP addresses running under the same installation of AOLserver. It's more secure and easier to manage if you have separate installations of AOLserver, instead. The first time you had a web server go down and take 40 others with it you would likely have thought better of it and stopped using virtual servers. As for Java support, you can use the CGI version of the Java web servlet interface, or the CGI version of Dynamo. Whether it's a module or not, the Java support has always been handled by a separate process like Java Web Server or Dynamo. Of course, you can add the module yourself, too, if you don't like the cgi thing, but you won't gain much because the bottleneck is in the separate Java server, anyway. Kris -- Kriston J. Rehberg America Online, Inc. http://kriston.net/ ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 25 Jun 1999 11:58:37 +0200 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Branimir Dolicki Subject: Re: AOLSERVER Digest - 23 Jun 1999 to 24 Jun 1999 In-Reply-To: <199906250402.AAA01866@services.web.aol.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Fri, 25 Jun 1999, Automatic digest processor wrote: > Date: Wed, 23 Jun 1999 21:44:36 -0500 > From: "J. Michael Roberts" > Subject: Re: AOLserver Version 3.0 [...] > > > On a good note, AOLserver now supports Tcl 7.6 instead of 7.4. What I > > really found the most interesting though was the change in the Tcl > > Interpreters. Correct me if I'm reading this wrong, but now if you want > > to re-source a Tcl file you have to restart the server. > > Man. That sure is how it reads, isn't it? Well. We can fix that. > Because: > > IT WILL BE OPEN SOURCE!!!! Well, this part has always been open source (at least we could see the source). "ns_inittcl" is a trivial Tcl proc which sits in bin/boot.tcl and calls "ns_source", which is an even more trivial Tcl proc which invokes standard Tcl command "source". So, as Lamar has said, you just take those and other Tcl scripts from 2.3.x. and load them into 3.0 (without even restarting it :-) -- Branimir ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 25 Jun 1999 13:01:09 +0200 Reply-To: strpic@lavsa.com Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Vid Strpic Subject: Re: AOLSERVER Digest - 22 Jun 1999 to 23 Jun 1999 In-Reply-To: <199906240406.AAA17808@services.web.aol.com>; from Automatic digest processor on Thu, Jun 24, 1999 at 12:01:45AM -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Thu, Jun 24, 1999 at 12:01:45AM -0400, Automatic digest processor wrote: > For those who haven't figured out how to hack off the the urls on > AOLserver's Website, the AOLserver version 3.0 documentation is > available at http://www.aolserver.com/server/docs/3.0/html/toc.htm. Access Denied You are not authorized to access the requested URL. Please enter an authorized username and password. For further assistance, contact the server administrator. Have they put that just today? Or I'm just having a bad luck? -- Vid Strpic, a.k.a MartiN 099536856 014855762 GCM/O d- s-:- a- C++++ UL++++ P+ L+++ E--- W+++ N+++ o K++ w--- O- M-- V-- PS+++ PE++ Y+ PGP+ t 5! X R- tv--- b+++ DI-- D+ G++ e++ h! r+++ y+ ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 25 Jun 1999 09:57:49 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Jeff Huber Subject: Tcl interpreters in AS 3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Branimir, You didn't get a chance to read the docs. The Tcl interpreters now work by a parent interpreter being created at startup. All Tcl code is sourced in this interpreter. Every connection that comes into AOLserver gets a *copy* of the parent interpreter. For example, if we dropped to a tcl eval and did a: ns_inittcl dogs.tcl The procedures in dog.tcl would be available for the rest of our Tcl script, but once the connection ends and the Tcl interpreter is released, the procedures in dogs.tcl are gone. There is no way to source a Tcl file in the parent interpreter after startup. (Unless you can do this is the nifty *telnet control port*.) I can think of a number of workarounds for this functionality. Since on a production server you would never (or rarely) need to re-source Tcl, you could include a line at the top of all Tcl scripts which would, on a devleopment server, source Tcl files which have changed. You could then use /NS/InitTcl/ to specify which files to source, etc. Branimir Dolicki wrote: > > On Fri, 25 Jun 1999, Automatic digest processor wrote: > > > Date: Wed, 23 Jun 1999 21:44:36 -0500 > > From: "J. Michael Roberts" > > Subject: Re: AOLserver Version 3.0 > > [...] > > > > > > On a good note, AOLserver now supports Tcl 7.6 instead of 7.4. What I > > > really found the most interesting though was the change in the Tcl > > > Interpreters. Correct me if I'm reading this wrong, but now if you want > > > to re-source a Tcl file you have to restart the server. > > > > Man. That sure is how it reads, isn't it? Well. We can fix that. > > Because: > > > > IT WILL BE OPEN SOURCE!!!! > > Well, this part has always been open source (at least we could see the > source). "ns_inittcl" is a trivial Tcl proc which sits in bin/boot.tcl > and calls "ns_source", which is an even more trivial Tcl proc which > invokes standard Tcl command "source". > > So, as Lamar has said, you just take those and other Tcl scripts from > 2.3.x. and load them into 3.0 (without even restarting it :-) > > -- Branimir -- ---------------------------------------------- | Jeff Huber | Web Applications Developer | | jeff@am.net | AM.net - http://am.net | ---------------------------------------------- ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 25 Jun 1999 11:59:48 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: jim@rubylane.com Subject: Re: Tcl interpreters in AS 3.0 In-Reply-To: <3773B50D.F47526B1@am.net> from "Jeff Huber" at Jun 25, 99 09:57:49 am Content-Type: text I for one like the idea of having procedures with "TCL thread" scope. It's a pain to have to carefully name "internal" TCL helper procedures so that they don't conflict with any other procedures in the server. Having said that, it would also be very useful to be able to source a file such that the procedures override the same procedures in the parent interpreter. We frequently have to change procedures that we define at startup (like, for bug fixes), and I wouldn't want to have to restart the whole server just to get a new procedure definition installed. This reminds me of the ns_share/global functionality. Maybe we need ns_proc to define a procedure permanently resident in the parent interp which also forces a copy to the other interps somehow, while proc would define the more limited scope procedure. Jim > > Branimir, > > You didn't get a chance to read the docs. The Tcl interpreters now work > by a parent interpreter being created at startup. All Tcl code is > sourced in this interpreter. Every connection that comes into AOLserver > gets a *copy* of the parent interpreter. For example, if we dropped to a > tcl eval and did a: > > ns_inittcl dogs.tcl > > The procedures in dog.tcl would be available for the rest of our Tcl > script, but once the connection ends and the Tcl interpreter is > released, the procedures in dogs.tcl are gone. > > There is no way to source a Tcl file in the parent interpreter after > startup. (Unless you can do this is the nifty *telnet control port*.) > > I can think of a number of workarounds for this functionality. Since on > a production server you would never (or rarely) need to re-source Tcl, > you could include a line at the top of all Tcl scripts which would, on a > devleopment server, source Tcl files which have changed. You could then > use /NS/InitTcl/ to specify which files to source, etc. > > > Branimir Dolicki wrote: > > > > On Fri, 25 Jun 1999, Automatic digest processor wrote: > > > > > Date: Wed, 23 Jun 1999 21:44:36 -0500 > > > From: "J. Michael Roberts" > > > Subject: Re: AOLserver Version 3.0 > > > > [...] > > > > > > > > > On a good note, AOLserver now supports Tcl 7.6 instead of 7.4. What I > > > > really found the most interesting though was the change in the Tcl > > > > Interpreters. Correct me if I'm reading this wrong, but now if you want > > > > to re-source a Tcl file you have to restart the server. > > > > > > Man. That sure is how it reads, isn't it? Well. We can fix that. > > > Because: > > > > > > IT WILL BE OPEN SOURCE!!!! > > > > Well, this part has always been open source (at least we could see the > > source). "ns_inittcl" is a trivial Tcl proc which sits in bin/boot.tcl > > and calls "ns_source", which is an even more trivial Tcl proc which > > invokes standard Tcl command "source". > > > > So, as Lamar has said, you just take those and other Tcl scripts from > > 2.3.x. and load them into 3.0 (without even restarting it :-) > > > > -- Branimir > > -- > ---------------------------------------------- > | Jeff Huber | Web Applications Developer | > | jeff@am.net | AM.net - http://am.net | > ---------------------------------------------- > ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 26 Jun 1999 15:03:36 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Jeff Huber Subject: Re: speculation on why AOL ripped out so much stuff MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Now that I've had a piece of AD layer cake and am feeling better, there's a few comments I've been holding back. - Ironically if the AOLserver Website was running AOLserver 3.0, since directory browsing is no longer supported, we would probably not have found the 3.0 documentation directory. - A lot of the stuff they took out wasn't really that cool anyway. As many have mentioned, a lot of the stuff (*not all of it*) is implemented as Tcl files that everyone still has. Most /NS/Admin & /NS/Db/* functionality is implemented as Tcl. The only problem I see is they took out ExtendedTableInfo which will break a lot but can be worked around. (ODBC datasources wouldn't work with ExtendedTableInfo so we wrote Tcl code to emulate ExtendedTableInfo behavior.) - Taking out the Setup Server & /NS/Admin and replacing it with a "telnet control port" has to be one of the more interesting moves. I'd love to see Jim Davidson--who I have much respect for--come on this list and defend why this was done. To be honest though, the Setup Server kind of sucked. It was only good for restarting AOLserver and looking at the server log when all virtual servers died. For those who didn't get to read the docs, one of the coolest things about the "telnet control port" was it supports tab completion. So you could type ns_socks [tab] and it would fillin the rest of the command. The silliest thing about the "telnet control port" is you can use vi to edit files within it. I wonder how much time they spent on that. - What Greenspun says below makes sense. If you think about what was taken out you can see how it would make the code much cleaner. For example, the interpreter model now is much easier to understand. It is clear that taking out multiple virtual servers will greatly cleanup the code. (Of course we're just going to add it right back.) - Most importantly, we should remember we may be loosing some features but we are gaining the source code. This significantly outweighs any lost features. I think that is enough for me for now. I'm going to go dust off my MSDN CDs and Win32 book. So who is helping with the port? A note to my previous email: Although I listed that AOLpress support was removed, I was re-reading some of the docs (Opps. I should of cleared my browser cache; sorry AOL) and there is a new parameter in ns/server/server-name named EnableAOLpress. I'm not sure what it does though. Philip Greenspun wrote: > > It is fun to speculate on why AOL ripped out so much stuff from 3.0. > Here are my favorites from recent mailing list: > > features. I wonder if there are third party licensing concerns or security > issues behind these ommisions? Any one of these ommisions would provide a good > reason not to move to 3.0 and yet they provide a whole list! > > > I suspect a lot of code was removed because AOL didn't want it to become > > Open Source. > > I've been working with AOL since December to open-source the thing. The > truth is much simpler than some of you guys might suppose: > > 1) they waited for 3.0 to open source the server because they were a bit > embarrassed by some of the cruft that had accumulated over four years in > Navi/GNN/AOLserver > > 2) they ripped out a bunch of features because (a) they don't use them > on AOL's high-volume sites (like DigitalCity), (b) they complicate > maintenance and extension of the server code base, and (c) they think > they could be done in modules outside of the server core > > This is actually pretty common in the world of complex software. It > eventually gets too complex for anyone to understand so people do a > leaner meaner rewrite. > > Don't cry too hard for your lost feature bloat. Be assured that four > years from now AOLserver will be just as bloated with new and even > weirder features. > > I also know that AOL itself is working on making Tcl 8.1 part of the > server. They just couldn't get it done in time and sensibly decided to > release an improvement. Jim Davidson, the original NaviServer > architect, worked a lot on 3.0. He is a tasteful thoughtful guy and 3.0 > is the best Web server for his needs (i.e., heavy and reliable support > for Tcl, databases, ADP; clean and fast static file serving; easy > configuration). > > Philip -- ---------------------------------------------- | Jeff Huber | Web Applications Developer | | jeff@am.net | AM.net - http://am.net | ---------------------------------------------- ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 27 Jun 1999 10:00:28 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Farshad Nayeri Subject: Re: speculation on why AOL ripped out so much stuff Comments: To: jeff@AM.NET MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jeff Huber wrote: > Taking out the Setup Server & /NS/Admin and replacing it with a > "telnet control port" has to be one of the more interesting moves. I'd > love to see Jim Davidson--who I have much respect for--come on this list > and defend why this was done. To be honest though, the Setup Server kind > of sucked. It was only good for restarting AOLserver and looking at the > server log when all virtual servers died. Presumably the new init.tcl can include abritrarily complex Tcl code. Without dumbing down the initialization script, it would be impossible to implement /NS/Admin. I suspect browser-based configuration was a selling point for NaviServer as a commercial product. This the kind of thing that demos well and creeps into product feature lists but one that doesn't work as well in real-world scenarios. -- Farshad ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 27 Jun 1999 10:40:02 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Farshad Nayeri Subject: Re: speculation on why AOL ripped out so much stuff Comments: cc: philg@mit.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Philip Greenspun said: > [Ripping out legacy features] is actually pretty common > in the world of complex software. It eventually gets > too complex for anyone to understand so people do a > leaner meaner rewrite. I tend to disagree. This kind of revamping is not nearly as common as it should be! In most cases, commercial product developers can't rip things out because they are afraid of how customers may react. Distributed open-source projects can't rip things out because chances are _somebody_ thinks they should be left in. This gives AOLserver a tremendous advantage over other offerings. Open-sourcing it relieves its final deficiency. Kudos for everyone involved for taking the plunge! -- Farshad ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 27 Jun 1999 13:14:17 -0500 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: "J. Michael Roberts" Subject: Re: speculation on why AOL ripped out so much stuff In-Reply-To: <37754E38.893D554E@am.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII > I think that is enough for me for now. I'm going to go dust off my MSDN > CDs and Win32 book. So who is helping with the port? Oh, I'll be helping with the port. I've been waiting for open source for a looong time. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 27 Jun 1999 10:47:27 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Jim Wilcoxson Subject: Suggestion Comments: To: feedback@aolserver.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" It would be cool if AOLServer logged a notice when library files were being loaded. We put an ns_log at the beginning and end of every TCL file that goes in modules with the name of the file so that we can tell where the problem is if an error occurs. Otherwise, getting a TCL error logged during startup is not too useful. It would also help new users see the unusual (though useful) way AOLServer loads TCL procs. I know it recently reminded me, and I've been at this a while... Jim _____________________________________________ Jim Wilcoxson, Owner Ruby Lane Fine Art, Antiques and Collectibles 1.888.782.9586 (+1.415.864.4563) http://www.rubylane.com ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 27 Jun 1999 11:07:51 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Jim Wilcoxson Subject: Suggestion - exit Comments: To: feedback@aolserver.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" While I'm making suggestions, it would also be cool if AOLServer's TCL function "exit" caused the current thread to stop rather than the whole server. We have wanted this many times when we are inside nested procs and detect an error that we either can't recover from, or don't want to try to recover. We'd like to do an ns_return and spit out some HTML that says "there is a big problem" or "you goofed big time" and then stop. I know we can simulate this by defining a special procedure "threadexit", putting top-level catches in ns_sourcefile, inventing a special error code to signal a thread exit, redefining "catch" to ignore it, ..., but that's a lot of trouble, wouldn't work for registered/scheduled procedures, blah, blah, blah. Jim _____________________________________________ Jim Wilcoxson, Owner Ruby Lane Fine Art, Antiques and Collectibles 1.888.782.9586 (+1.415.864.4563) http://www.rubylane.com ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 11:19:39 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: "Kriston J. Rehberg" Subject: Re: AOLserver 3.0 In-Reply-To: <104040509@toto.iv> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit John D. Mitchell writes: >Blech! If we're going to have to go to so much trouble, why not refactor >the design and take a fresh take at the implementation? Actually, this was precisely one of the things done for AOLserver 3.0. The server is more tip-top than ever for 3.0. You will like what you see, trust me! Kris -- Kriston J. Rehberg America Online, Inc. http://kriston.net/ ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 11:29:35 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: "Kriston J. Rehberg" Subject: Re: speculation on why AOL ripped out so much stuff In-Reply-To: <76906856@toto.iv> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jeff Huber wrote: > Taking out the Setup Server & /NS/Admin and replacing it with a > "telnet control port" has to be one of the more interesting moves. I'd > love to see Jim Davidson--who I have much respect for--come on this list > and defend why this was done. To be honest though, the Setup Server kind > of sucked. It was only good for restarting AOLserver and looking at the > server log when all virtual servers died. Let me spare Jim the trouble. Many of us have been advocating the control port feature for a long time. The setup server became too bloated and too cumbersome to use for many of the features we wanted to add (to see what I mean, just look at the subsections for "nscache" et al). Even more people just editted the nsd.ini file directly. Besides, we found that most people turned off the setup server once the server went into production, and that was a pain because it essentially required that a web server administrator have root-level access to do such simple things as restarting the server. The control port allows precise control over the web server from an easy-to-learn tcl-based interface (it supports most of the GNU readline functionality like bash does, too). You can change parameters, find things out about the server, restart it, edit config files, check logs, and other things you just couldn't do quickly (or at all) in the web-based setup server. But one very good reason was this: The setup server became so bloated I'm sure some of you must have noticed how slow it became in the later versions of AOLserver. Kris -- Kriston J. Rehberg America Online, Inc. http://kriston.net/ ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 17:46:09 +0200 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Ray Davis Subject: nssybpd solaris intel Anyone have a solaris intel version of nssybpd (Sybase daemon) I could borrow? I promise to give it back. :) I'd like to test an eval version of Sybase we installed, but can't make the daemon because the include file ctpublic.h is missing. (I assume this is part of the Sybase release?) Reply to ray@carpe.net Thanks, Ray ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 11:58:16 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: jim@rubylane.com Subject: Re: speculation on why AOL ripped out so much stuff In-Reply-To: <14199.38111.659623.455934@mowmow.office.aol.com> from "Kriston J. Rehberg" at Jun 28, 99 11:29:35 am Content-Type: text Losing the setup server will hurt newbies the most I think. I used it initially to set things up or add a vserver, but other than that, I agree - it was not very good. In the latest version of AOLServer, there were all kinds of problems with it: new config params were sometimes missing, the DNSCache params got written out to the nsd.ini multiple times, etc. I'm all for losing it, but just keep in mind that it needs to be easy for new users to get things off the ground without having to understand everything in nsd.ini. That's would be intimidating to most users who just want to get a great web server running. Jim www.rubylane.com > > Jeff Huber wrote: > > > Taking out the Setup Server & /NS/Admin and replacing it with a > > "telnet control port" has to be one of the more interesting moves. I'd > > love to see Jim Davidson--who I have much respect for--come on this list > > and defend why this was done. To be honest though, the Setup Server kind > > of sucked. It was only good for restarting AOLserver and looking at the > > server log when all virtual servers died. > > Let me spare Jim the trouble. Many of us have been advocating the [snip] > > But one very good reason was this: The setup server became so bloated > I'm sure some of you must have noticed how slow it became in the later > versions of AOLserver. > > Kris > > -- > Kriston J. Rehberg > America Online, Inc. http://kriston.net/ > ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 14:31:00 -0600 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Ron Patterson Organization: MCI WorldCom Subject: Question on AS 3.0 "New Features" Question on AS 3.0 "New Features": Interesting about the removal of support for AOLpress, or as mentioned later, a new configuration parameter on EnableAOLpress. Doesn't this basically refer to support for the PUT header of HTTP? I don't see how this is very proprietary or that it's necessarily linked to AOLpress, specifically. Also a real important new restriction, if I understand what was said about the "New Features", is not being able to dynamically update Tcl procs and having to restart the server to load a changed proc each time. This seems like an extreme restriction. I make changes and test procs all the time. To restart the server for each change, especially when this is the only way to debug, would make the new AOLserver very un-useful and proc development and testing nearly impossible. I hope I've misunderstood this. Thanks, Ron =============================================================== Ron Patterson | MCI WorldCom (warehouseMCI) Ron.Patterson@wcom.com | 5775 Mark Dabling Blvd. 601-2386@mcimail.com | Dept. 2001/786 719-535-5727 | Colorado Springs, CO 80919 Fax: 719-535-6164 | AOL/IM: RonPDude ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 13:56:20 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Jeff Huber Subject: Re: Suggestion MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jim are you using AOLserver 2.1? In 2.3 AOL finally figured out that the ns_source errors in the server log weren't to helpful. They figured out if they modified the Tcl procedure ns_source in \bin\boot.tcl and changed the lines: if [catch {uplevel #0 "source $f"} err] { ns_log error ns_source: $err } to if [catch {uplevel #0 "source $f"} err] { ns_log error "ns_source: $err, file: $f" } that they would save people a lot of headaches. The modified ns_source now reports the filename were an error occurred during sourceing. Very helpful. I can't believe it took AOL so long to figure this out ;-). Jim Wilcoxson wrote: > > It would be cool if AOLServer logged a notice when library files were being > loaded. We put an ns_log at the beginning and end of every TCL file that > goes in modules with the name of the file so that we can tell where the > problem is if an error occurs. Otherwise, getting a TCL error logged > during startup is not too useful. > > It would also help new users see the unusual (though useful) way AOLServer > loads TCL procs. I know it recently reminded me, and I've been at this a > while... > > Jim > > _____________________________________________ > Jim Wilcoxson, Owner > Ruby Lane Fine Art, Antiques and Collectibles > 1.888.782.9586 (+1.415.864.4563) > http://www.rubylane.com -- ---------------------------------------------- | Jeff Huber | Web Applications Developer | | jeff@am.net | AM.net - http://am.net | ---------------------------------------------- ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 17:42:09 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Lamar Owen Subject: Re: Question on AS 3.0 "New Features" MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Ron Patterson wrote: > > Question on AS 3.0 "New Features": Interesting about the removal of > support for AOLpress, or as mentioned later, a new configuration > parameter on EnableAOLpress. Doesn't this basically refer to support > for the PUT header of HTTP? I don't see how this is very proprietary > or that it's necessarily linked to AOLpress, specifically. My opinion (which is worth the cost of e-mai postage:-)) is that this indicates removal of support for the BROWSE method and "Mini-Webs" that AOLpress uses. This will sting a little -- AOLpress is by far the easiest to use HTML WYSIWYG editor available (even if it IS slow as molasses, doesn't support many features, etc) -- I have a few people using it to upload files to my server. What will hurt me more than anything else is the loss of multiple Virtual Servers (not virtual hosts -- virtual servers), as I have five IP's on the one machine. Oh well -- solutions will be found. > Also a real important new restriction, if I understand what was said > about the "New Features", is not being able to dynamically update Tcl > procs and having to restart the server to load a changed proc each > time. At the risk of sounding cynical, sarcastic, and impish, this is not surprizing to me -- after all, Philip Greenspun has always been of the mind that you want to use *.tcl files instead of traditional tcl libraries -- and the AOL people are infatuated with *.adp's. Both of these mechanisms are potentially MAJOR security holes -- after all, a tcl script can shutdown the server. ANYONE's tcl script..... However, I can understand the reasoning that was given earlier -- each execution thread gets a COPY of the interpreter now -- this helps security, in my mind. I would personally like to see some security levels applied to some of the tcl commands. (In fact, this may be one of the things I attempt to implement) The solution I've used in the past is only allow *.tcl and *.adp on one secured virtual server, allowing PUT access to it only by trusted individuals -- the *.tcl allowance is global within a virtual server, so a server where untrusteds can upload files can not be allowed to execute *.tcl files. Of course, I could be missing something there. Restricting where *.tcl files can go (like *.adp's are restricted) would ease my mind some - have a TRUSTED class of tcl commands that can only be accessed within a particular directory, and allowing SAFE tcl commands to be executed anywhere would go a long way to easing my mind. How does/did Primehost accomplish this? Lamar Owen WGCR Internet Radio ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 15:02:26 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: jim@rubylane.com Subject: Re: Suggestion In-Reply-To: <3777E174.211AAB3A@am.net> from "Jeff Huber" at Jun 28, 99 01:56:20 pm Content-Type: text > > Jim are you using AOLserver 2.1? > > In 2.3 AOL finally figured out that the ns_source errors in the server > log weren't to helpful. They figured out if they modified the Tcl > procedure ns_source in \bin\boot.tcl and changed the lines: > Nope, we're using 2.3.2, but I've been doing the ns_log trick for a while. I didn't notice they added the source name recently for errors. For us, logging the start and end of the module is still useful. For example, here is some stuff from our startup log: [27/Jun/1999:00:30:47 -0700][32469.32471][rl] Error: _rlstr.tcl: no xlate file fo\ r en in files [27/Jun/1999:00:30:39 -0700][32454.32456][rl] Error: Db: Thread already owns 1 h\ andle from pool 'rl'. [27/Jun/1999:00:30:39 -0700][32454.32456][rl] Error: zinit.tcl: ns_db gethandle f\ ailed, restarting AOLServer! These aren't TCL eval errors, they are errors or messages that our startup scripts print. If we do a [catch and then log an error, the ns_source catch is never triggered. We could (and probably should) log the source filename in all ns_log messages, but that gets to be a bother. Thanks for letting me know about the new ns_source messages... Jim ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 18:20:56 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Jim Wilcoxson Subject: Proxy errors?? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" We have a customer that reported this error recently. They are using a MS 3.02 browser and have AOL 4.0 for their Internet access: Request Error ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Could not find a procedure to handle proxy method "GET" of protocol "http" on rl. For further assistance, contact the server administrator. They can access our site fine, but this error is reported when they click on a URL that takes them to another site (we're a search engine). We use a registered proc (for the GET method) that issues a redirect to the external site. The redirect is necessary so we can count clicks. This problem has never been reported before. Anyone have any ideas what is going on? Is there something unique about proxy method GET vs. non-proxy GET? Do we have to do something special with ns_register_proc?? Thanks for any info, Jim _____________________________________________ Jim Wilcoxson, Owner Ruby Lane Fine Art, Antiques and Collectibles 1.888.782.9586 (+1.415.864.4563) http://www.rubylane.com ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 19:17:19 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: "Peter M. Jansson" Subject: Re: Question on AS 3.0 "New Features" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lamar Owen wrote: > What will hurt me more than > anything else is the loss of multiple Virtual Servers (not virtual hosts > -- virtual servers), as I have five IP's on the one machine. This one's easy -- run 5 copies of AOLserver, one per IP address. AS 3.0 is lighter weight, so it's supposed to make sense to do it this way. If you run each AOLserver under a separate UID, you can enforce per-server disk and CPU quotas, and you can keep the users of one server from seeing/modifying the files of those of another. Also, if you have to restart an AOLserver, it'll only take down one server, instead of all the vs's in the process. Virtual servers really aren't gone, they're just handled in separate processes now. > Restricting where *.tcl files can go (like *.adp's are restricted) would > ease my mind some - have a TRUSTED class of tcl commands that can only > be accessed within a particular directory, and allowing SAFE tcl > commands to be executed anywhere would go a long way to easing my mind. > > How does/did Primehost accomplish this? I hate to bust your bubble on this one, but at Primehost, we never allowed scripting on a modern AOLserver (we planned to, but for reasons that are now at least visible, if not obvious, we never completed that upgrade work). So, since commercial-level customers only had tcl libraries and CGI (we never allowed *.tcl pages, as I recall -- but I bet someone will correct me!), we didn't have any facilities for trusted tcl. I note here that Tcl 8.x has SafeTcl extensions, which do a lot of what you're looking for. When Tcl and AOLserver become happy about using each other's thread models, this should really do the trick. Pete. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 21:52:43 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Colin Summers Subject: Re: AOLSERVER Digest - 27 Jun 1999 to 28 Jun 1999 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" >I'm all for losing it, but just keep in mind that it needs to be >easy for new users to get things off the ground without having to >understand everything in nsd.ini. That's would be intimidating to >most users who just want to get a great web server running. As a newbie about to boot up AOLServer for the first time, I appreciate this sentiment. --Colin ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1999 20:31:41 +0200 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Ray Davis Subject: Postgres driver + ExtendedTableInfo I noticed this comment from over a year ago while greping my aolserver list archive for something: > From: "Kriston J. Rehberg" > Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 12:19:06 -0500 > Subject: Re: Status of Postgres driver? ... > When you use the "get schema", "create table" and other functions from > the /NS/Admin screens, you're using a feature we call > "ExtendedTableInfo". It's true that the "ExtendedTableInfo" support > in recent versions of the Postgres driver is broken. What I do is simply create the ns2_columns and ns2_tables tables when I create a Postgres database for aolserver. I haven't tried every feature, but it seems that all the db/admin stuff works fine. Here is my create_db_postgres script: #!/bin/ksh me=`basename $0` if [ $# -ne 1 ] then echo "usage: $me new_database_name" exit 1 fi if [ "`whoami`" != "postgres" ] then echo "$me: error: must run as user postgres" exit 1 fi . ~postgres/.env set -x DB="$1" psql template1 < Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Lamar Owen Subject: Re: Postgres driver + ExtendedTableInfo MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Ray Davis wrote: > > I noticed this comment from over a year ago while greping my aolserver > list archive for something: > > > From: "Kriston J. Rehberg" > > Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 12:19:06 -0500 > > Subject: Re: Status of Postgres driver? > ... > > When you use the "get schema", "create table" and other functions from > > the /NS/Admin screens, you're using a feature we call > > "ExtendedTableInfo". It's true that the "ExtendedTableInfo" support > > in recent versions of the Postgres driver is broken. > Love your scripts, Ray... I wish I had had something of that nature back in the days of AOLserver 2.1 and PostgreSQL 6.1. Oh well, things were fixed for 2.3. This is interesting, as I have not had ANY problems with recent versions (2.3.3) of the postgres.so driver and ExtendedTableInfo -- I use it constantly (this will be one of the "opportunities" I will have when migrating to 3.x). I have found, however, that you really must recompile the Postgres driver in order for it to work properly -- postgres is quite picky about proper libpq linkage -- a postgres.so linked agains a Postgres95 v1 libpq is going to barf on a PostgreSQL 6.5 backend. However, a postgres.so linked against libpq from 6.5 will barf just as badly against an older backend as well. The moral? Recompile your postgres.so every time you update your postgres. Of course, my ns_columns and ns_tables tables were created back in the 2.2.1 beta postgres.so days -- maybe the creation scripts got broken since then. Big thanks to Mark Dalrymple for his assistance, as well as Doug McKee's -- that beta 2.2.1 postgres.so plus some tcl "enhancements" of my own were my introduction to AOLserver+postgres+ExtendedTableInfo. Lamar Owen WGCR Internet Radio ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1999 17:32:00 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Herbert Samuels Organization: Pure Source Subject: Re: AOLSERVER Digest - 26 Jun 1999 to 27 Jun 1999 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi All, Does anyone here use Illustra (on NT) in a heavy load environment for indexing/searching site content? I am considering it, but am wondering about performance, scalabilty, etc. Any horror/hero stories about it? Thanks, Herbert Samuels ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1999 17:59:08 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: John Buckman Organization: Lyris Technologies Inc. Subject: Re: AOLSERVER Digest - 26 Jun 1999 to 27 Jun 1999 In-Reply-To: <199906292213.SAA25696@services.web.aol.com> > Does anyone here use Illustra (on NT) in a heavy load environment for > indexing/searching site content? > I am considering it, but am wondering about performance, scalabilty, > etc. > Any horror/hero stories about it? Yes, I have tons of horror stories. Don't do it! I tried to make it work at http://tile.net and banged on it for several months but eventually gave up, writing a custom C++ app right in AolServer (on Unix, using dbm files). jb --- This email message was written using voice recognition software, due to persistent hand problems I have. Please excuse any recognition mistakes. John Buckman - Lyris Technologies Inc. - www.lyris.com Developers of MailShield Anti-Spam Software and Lyris Email List Server ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 30 Jun 1999 10:59:17 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: "Kriston J. Rehberg" Subject: Re: Postgres driver + ExtendedTableInfo In-Reply-To: <82539617@toto.iv> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, The postgres driver in the examples directory was brought back to life about the time AOLserver 2.3 was released. It now creates the tables you need and should work fine with 6.x of Postgres. The source code is there for anyone's use (that's how we got some new drivers, like Solid and Oracle, from third parties). The person who updated it said it was a relatively simple change (it was merely DOA after later versions of AOLserver deprecated and changed some functionality it used). Kris -- Kriston J. Rehberg America Online, Inc. http://kriston.net/ ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 30 Jun 1999 18:59:43 +0200 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Ray Davis Subject: Re: Postgres driver + ExtendedTableInfo In-Reply-To: Lamar Owen's message <37791D6E.9C787C54@wgcr.org> of Tue, 29 Jun 1999 15:24:30 EDT. > > I noticed this comment from over a year ago while greping my aolserver > > list archive for something: > > > > > From: "Kriston J. Rehberg" > > > Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 12:19:06 -0500 > > > Subject: Re: Status of Postgres driver? > > ... > > > When you use the "get schema", "create table" and other functions from > > > the /NS/Admin screens, you're using a feature we call > > > "ExtendedTableInfo". It's true that the "ExtendedTableInfo" support > > > in recent versions of the Postgres driver is broken. ... > This is interesting, as I have not had ANY problems with recent versions > (2.3.3) of the postgres.so driver and ExtendedTableInfo -- I use it > constantly (this will be one of the "opportunities" I will have when > migrating to 3.x). I have found, however, that you really must > recompile the Postgres driver in order for it to work properly -- > postgres is quite picky about proper libpq linkage -- a postgres.so > linked agains a Postgres95 v1 libpq is going to barf on a PostgreSQL 6.5 > backend. However, a postgres.so linked against libpq from 6.5 will barf > just as badly against an older backend as well. The moral? Recompile > your postgres.so every time you update your postgres. In our case the aolserver is 2.3.3 and is a fresh install, postgres is the latest and just built - as well as the postgres.so. The first table we created vea aolserver did not automatically create the ns2_columns and ns2_tables tables. I did have a lot of problems loading a ~7000 record csv file into a table. It eventually dies stating that one line had 167 fields and should only have 13 - which is completely bogus. The data has gone through a number of cleanups and I *know* every line is perfect csv and has 13 fields. Eventually I gave up and wrote a program to convert to postgres "copy from" format and simply used psql to load the table. Probably a better idea anyway. ;) Cheers, Ray ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 30 Jun 1999 16:52:01 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Lamar Owen Subject: Re: Postgres driver + ExtendedTableInfo MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit "Kriston J. Rehberg" wrote: > The postgres driver in the examples directory was brought back to life > about the time AOLserver 2.3 was released. It now creates the tables > you need and should work fine with 6.x of Postgres. The source code > is there for anyone's use (that's how we got some new drivers, like > Solid and Oracle, from third parties). The person who updated it said > it was a relatively simple change (it was merely DOA after later > versions of AOLserver deprecated and changed some functionality it > used). Looks like I got in just under the wire -- thank goodness I haven't needed to start from scratch since. However, I am confused, now. Looking at the postgres.c code, I am having difficulty finding where the two extended info tables are being created. I think that occurs in tcl, however, grepping through the tcl stuff does not yeild a single create ns2_tables or create ns2_columns -- ANYWHERE. So, just for laughs, I checked the c source for the sybase proxy, for solid, and for postgres. The string "ns2" doesn't occur there anywhere -- where are these tables being created?? Of course, ExtendedTableInfo is being dropped (supposedly) from AOLserver 3.0, so, I guess I shouldn't mind. For the record, here's what I got from AOLserver support (Thanks, Eric) back then (then being late October 1997) -- notice the line about "works with the nsd db init code...." I have edited for relevant content -- many extraneous things snipped: ---------------Begin transcripts---------- Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 11:00:56 -0500 (EST) From: Eric O'Laughlen Subject: Re: [anchor@CITCOM.NET: Not really a bug report, just a question.] Cc: doug@aol.net, gnachman@aol.net, markd@aol.net Hello, > In AOLserver 2.1 for Linux, I am attempting to use Postgres. The > ns2_tables and ns2_columns tables are not created automatically. I have > searched the setup and db tcl code for the SQL create statements > necessary to create these tables, but did not find them. Could you > please e-mail the structure of these two tables? create table ns2_tables ( t_table varchar(255), t_key varchar(255), t_value varchar(255)); create table ns2_columns ( c_table varchar(128), c_col varchar(128), c_key varchar(255), c_value varchar(255)); create index ns2_tables_by_t_table on ns2_table using btree(t_table text_ops); create index ns2_columns_by_c_table_c_col using btree(c_table,c_col text_ops); Here's the structure of the tables that you requested. We are in the process of upgrading the Postgres95 module to work well with Postgres95 6.2.x. If you can, I would suggest waiting until we roll out a patch. Even with the table structure, there's still some quarks with various functions and with using the ns_db API. We do distribute the code for the Postgres95 driver though, and you can feel free to experiment with it. Hope this helps, o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o | Eric O'Laughlen e-mail: erico@aol.net| | AOL Web Development W: 703.918.2142 | o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o ----------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 15:40:06 -0500 (EST) From: Eric O'Laughlen Subject: beta of Postgres95 driver. On Wed, 29 Oct 1997, Anchor Baptist wrote: Hey, > Ok, I think I can do that, if the time lag isn't too long... :-) I'm > using this in a production IntraNET, and I'm trying to come up to speed > on Tcl, SQL, Postgres, et al. in short order. Might I say, though, the > AOLserver portion of this brew is so far the one that is working the > best. I'm more than willing to beta test an PostgreSQL enhancements you Here you go :). Let us know how the module works with your system. BTW, it was built on a Slackware 2.x box, but it should work without a hiccup on your RedHat box. > may have -- I assume you know that the 6.2.1 release is out, and that > the pre-6.2 problem with SQL-92's NOT NULL clause was fixed, among other > things. If you have that updated Postgres95 version, then this beta module should work correctly for you. The problems with the various ns_db API cmds and the Ad Hoc query/Tcl interfaces seem to be ironed out with this update, but let us know how it goes. o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o | Eric O'Laughlen e-mail: erico@aol.net| | AOL Web Development W: 703.918.2142 | o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o ---------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 18:27:36 -0500 From: Anchor Baptist Reply-To: admin@wgcr.org Organization: Anchor Baptist Church & Ministries To: Eric O'Laughlen Subject: Re: [anchor@CITCOM.NET: Not really a bug report, just a question.] Eric O'Laughlen wrote: > create index ns2_tables_by_t_table on ns2_table > using btree(t_table text_ops); > > create index ns2_columns_by_c_table_c_col > using btree(c_table,c_col text_ops); After installing the beta postgres driver, AOLserver 2.2.1, and upgrading our postgres to 6.2.1 (was at 6.1.1), I created the tables ns2_tables and ns2_columns. However, the two index creates above don't compute. I think there are dropped characters from the end -- I'm thinking the two indexes should be: create index ns2_tables_by_t_table on ns2_tables using btree(t_table text_ops); create index ns2_columns_by_c_table_c_col on ns2_columns using btree(c_table,c_col text_ops); Correct me if I'm wrong. Also, the gensql form generates an extraneous " when fed the creates you originally sent me, whereas creating them in psql produced no errors. Segment of log: [29/Oct/1997:18:17:42 -0500][11571.13314][internal] Error: Ns_PgExec(www.wgcr.org:5432:intranet): Could not send query 'create table ns2_tables ( t_table varchar(255), t_key varchar(255), t_value varchar(255)); ': WARN:parser: parse error at or near " " ----------END of LOG SEGMENT--------------------- Thanks! Lamar Owen WGCR Internet Radio ------------------------------------------------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 12:12:43 -0500 (EST) From: Eric O'Laughlen Subject: Re: [anchor@CITCOM.NET: Not really a bug report, just a question.] To: admin@wgcr.org Hey Lamar, > Correct me if I'm wrong. Sorry about that...you are correct. There's an easier way to do it now because the module that I gave you works with the nsd db initialization code and those tables will be created automatically. You don't need to create them. I would suggest dropping those tables (the ns_* ones) because AS will create them for you. Let me know how it goes. o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o | Eric O'Laughlen e-mail: erico@aol.net| | AOL Web Development W: 703.918.2142 | o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o Date: Mon, 03 Nov 1997 12:35:32 -0500 (EST) From: Eric O'Laughlen Subject: Re: Error in nsdb/util.tcl causing quotes around oid fields. To: admin@wgcr.org > I found my problem with the quotes. Change nsdb/util.tcl, module > ns_dbquotevalue: I was going to get back to you on this one and I figured it was this API call. I'll modify the code. > Postgres returns a type of "" (unknown) for an oid field. > > Now, I'm having difficulties with the date ordering of Postgres vs. what > the Update form is expecting. Postgres (as I currently have it > configured -- there may be something I can change here) is returning a > date in the form mm-dd-yyyy, whereas the Update form code is assuming > yyyy-dd-mm. I haven't dug into the tcl yet for this one -- too many > other things I have to chase today. Alright...let me see what I can find about this one. I'll get back to you when I have something. Thanks, o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o | Eric O'Laughlen e-mail: erico@aol.net| | AOL Web Development W: 703.918.2142 | o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o [The date ordering problem was fixed by adding "set datestyle='ISO'" in postgres.c for a permanent fix -- I had fixed it in the tcl for the update form. The other problems were all fixed in the postgres.c module -- the oid quoting issue, and ExtendedTableInfo. I understand all but the ExtendedTableInfo] --------------End of transcripts-------- Lamar Owen WGCR Internet Radio ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 30 Jun 1999 14:26:24 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Jeff Huber Subject: Re: Illustra Site Searching on NT MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Herbert, The AOLserver/Illustra full-text stuff is nice. You can easily run Illustra full-text in a low traffic environment but for heavy load Illustra is not a good choice. I would recommend Infoseek's Ultraseek Server (http://software.infoseek.com/products/ultraseek/ultratop.htm). It's extremely solid; nothing really compares. Herbert Samuels wrote: > > Hi All, > > Does anyone here use Illustra (on NT) in a heavy load environment for > indexing/searching site content? > I am considering it, but am wondering about performance, scalabilty, > etc. > Any horror/hero stories about it? > > Thanks, > > Herbert Samuels -- ---------------------------------------------- | Jeff Huber | Web Applications Developer | | jeff@am.net | AM.net - http://am.net | ---------------------------------------------- ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 1 Jul 1999 01:19:53 +0200 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: "Edward C. Zimmermann" Subject: Re: Illustra Site Searching on NT In-Reply-To: <377A8B80.C6E5D05F@am.net> from "Jeff Huber" at Jun 30, 99 02:26:24 pm MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Herbert, > > The AOLserver/Illustra full-text stuff is nice. You can easily run > Illustra full-text in a low traffic environment but for heavy load > Illustra is not a good choice. I would recommend Infoseek's Ultraseek > Server (http://software.infoseek.com/products/ultraseek/ultratop.htm). > It's extremely solid; nothing really compares. Compares for what? - Price? Expensive, based upon number of documents. A tiny 10K record database costs $5 short of $5K and it goes up from there. If you only have a few records there are quite a few acceptable free solutions around. - System Requirements? - Usage restrictions? - Capacity? The absolute limit is 32 Million records (which is perhaps just as well since it would probably cost a small kingdom for the license). - Indexing speed? They list as the max. index speed "over 15,000 documents per hour" which comes down to a pitiful and embarrasing 4.17/second (and I'm not sure what hardware they mean but I don't think its a Timex/Sinclair)--- I'm just reading their product specification sheet and it does not seem to be a bad typo but at $5K for 10K records I guess most indexing processes run fast :-) - Search speed? Its an OK engine and it does have some nice features (their spider is probably one of its strongest points) and the Webfront interface is nice but... -- ______________________ Edward C. Zimmermann Basis Systeme netzwerk/Munich