========================================================================= Date: Sun, 1 Aug 1999 23:01:19 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: jim@rubylane.com Subject: Re: Simultaneous DB access crashes AOLserver 2.3.3 In-Reply-To: from "Michael A. Cleverly" at Jul 30, 99 00:22:22 am Content-Type: text Hi Michael - I ran into exactly the same problem with a dual CPU machine. This was a production machine, so I actually tried configuring only 1 database handle. That did solve the problem, but we still had very frequent server reboots. We ended up (and are still) running the dual CPU machine with the 2nd processor disabled. :( We are still having random server issues, but they are less frequent than when both CPUs were enabled. Our outstanding problems with AOLServer are: 1. TCL's [exec function sometimes hangs, sometimes chewing up CPU time in sched_yield. I hacked our kernel after talking to the pthreads library guru - there's a patch to put in the Linux exec function so that signal info is "privatized" during exec. It makes things much better, to the point of being impossible for me to duplicate the problem in a test environment, but execs still sometimes hang for us in production. 2. Our servers randomly reboot about 3 times/week. I have tried to get them to core dump (special startup script that sets the core dump ulimit to unlimited), but they won't. 3. We have to kill our server once a day because there appear to be memory leaks. Server memory usage gradually creeps up until it is using over 100MB. 4. Sometimes during server reboots, the log says "restarting server" and then it hangs - no zombie processes. 5. Sometimes during server reboots, the server hangs with outstanding zombie processes. We have written all kinds of server monitoring and "kicking" routines that do periodic ps/http get commands and kill the server if there is no response. 6. We run two servers on each machine. One is for background jobs and runs at a lower prioity. Sometimes during server reboots, one server starts fine, the other gets all kinds of shared library problems, like "can't resolve symbol blah". The specific symbol changes and appears totally random - sometimes in the Solid DB library nssolid.so, sometimes in the permission library, ... Once this happens it can be very difficult to get the server to start. Shutting both down, taking them out of inittab, killing them, and then enabling them one at a time again often works. But we have also had to reboot to get them to both start. It seems more like a Linux shared library problem to me, but not sure. 7. We run a large database rebuild 4 times a day. During the last few minutes of this, our machine thrashes pretty badly, and this causes the server to be very slow to handle requests. The pending requests pile up and apparently eat up all the file descriptors for the server process. This causes it to fall on its face. I think this is because AOLServer 2.3.3 accepts all incoming connections immediately in order to do server busy and queueing statistics. I believe this is no longer done in version 3, and that is why the busy and checkstats features were removed. The checkstats feature was nice, but given a choice I'd rather have the pending connections just queue up rather than cause the server to starting blowing up on requests. In the next few weeks I need to get RH6.0 installed and version 3 of the server on a dual CPU machine to see if these problems are solved (and see which new ones are created). If you find any solutions, I'd be very interested. Thanks, Jim Wilcoxson www.rubylane.com > > For most of the past year and a half I've been running AOLserver 2.3.x on > a single processor Pentium 200 running Linux 2.0.x. Recently I purchased > a dual P3-500 (running Linux 2.0.36 / glibc2). > > I'm getting ready to deploy a new website. I tried using Sybase as the db > backend but can't get AOLserver + Sybase + the ext. db driver to send > data back at anything greater than 75 rows/sec. > > So, I decided to stick with Solid... I've found, however, that if I have > two seperate page requests that hit the Solid database at the same time > (grabbing only two out of the 5 db handles I have configured) that > AOLserver will without fail catch an exception and die, and restart > itself. (This also happens if I setup two seperate pools and have each > script get a handle from a different pool.) I've tried this with Solid > 2.3, Solid 2.3 MT, Solid 3.0, and Solid 3.0 MT. > > I can also get the server to restart from the Evaluate SQL admin page just > by doing a select * from foo (where foo is a large table so it would take > a sec or two to prepare the results) and then toggling to another browser > window and repeating a simillar query. Again, it doesn't make a > difference whether they come from the same pool or not. > > I've never noticed this behavior before on my old machine. I'm kind of at > a loss as to what to try. I figure configuring AOLserver to only access a > single pool that only has 1 handle would fix the problem, but that is > obviously far from ideal.... I NEED HELP! Anyone run into this? :-) > > Michael A. Cleverly > michael@cleverly.com > ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 2 Aug 1999 14:10:47 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Brad Chick Subject: changing http status codes Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed AOLServer 2.3.3 writes a status code of 0 to the access log for calls to .tcl files. That makes it difficult to do any analysis of the log with a log analysis tool (current favorite being analog). Is there a way to change the status code that AOLServer returns in the case of .tcl scripts? Thanks Brad Chick Do It Sports ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 2 Aug 1999 16:44:58 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: George Nachman Subject: Re: AOLSERVER Digest - 28 Jul 1999 to 31 Jul 1999 In-Reply-To: <199908010401.AAA08588@services.web.aol.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII I just posted a new version of nssolid on ftp.aolserver.com for Linux boxes running glibc 2.x, and it has the latest solid library linked with it (the one in 2.3.3 is a little old). You'll probably have to upgrade your system, but this may well solve the problem. On Sun, 1 Aug 1999, Automatic digest processor wrote: > Date: Fri, 30 Jul 1999 00:22:22 -0600 > From: "Michael A. Cleverly" > Subject: Simultaneous DB access crashes AOLserver 2.3.3 > > For most of the past year and a half I've been running AOLserver 2.3.x on > a single processor Pentium 200 running Linux 2.0.x. Recently I purchased > a dual P3-500 (running Linux 2.0.36 / glibc2). > > I'm getting ready to deploy a new website. I tried using Sybase as the db > backend but can't get AOLserver + Sybase + the ext. db driver to send > data back at anything greater than 75 rows/sec. > > So, I decided to stick with Solid... I've found, however, that if I have > two seperate page requests that hit the Solid database at the same time > (grabbing only two out of the 5 db handles I have configured) that > AOLserver will without fail catch an exception and die, and restart > itself. (This also happens if I setup two seperate pools and have each > script get a handle from a different pool.) I've tried this with Solid > 2.3, Solid 2.3 MT, Solid 3.0, and Solid 3.0 MT. > > I can also get the server to restart from the Evaluate SQL admin page just > by doing a select * from foo (where foo is a large table so it would take > a sec or two to prepare the results) and then toggling to another browser > window and repeating a simillar query. Again, it doesn't make a > difference whether they come from the same pool or not. > > I've never noticed this behavior before on my old machine. I'm kind of at > a loss as to what to try. I figure configuring AOLserver to only access a > single pool that only has 1 handle would fix the problem, but that is > obviously far from ideal.... I NEED HELP! Anyone run into this? :-) > > Michael A. Cleverly > michael@cleverly.com > ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 2 Aug 1999 15:48:42 -0500 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: "J. Michael Roberts" Subject: PostgreSQL driver In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.19990802140732.00d94850@mail.ic.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Has anyone compiled the postgres.so driver lately? I seem to recall hearing that someone had updated it, but Web searches turn up nothing except the same old code that I'm not having much luck with. More specifically has anyone compiled it with gcc under Solaris 2.5 against PostgreSQL 6.5.1? (OK, highly unlikely that many have installed 6.5.1 yet, but hope springs eternal...) Anybody care to take a stab at what the compiler and linker flags should be for gcc? Here's what shows in the log: Warning: Load of '/usr/local/AOLserver/bin/postgres.so' failed: ld.so.1: bin/nsd: fatal: libpg.so: can't open file: errno=2 You'd think that what's happening, is that it just can't find libpq.so, but I've included -R/usr/local/pgsql/lib in the loader flags.... Anybody got any more ideas? Michael ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 2 Aug 1999 19:00:28 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Lamar Owen Organization: WGCR Internet Radio Subject: Re: PostgreSQL driver MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit "J. Michael Roberts" wrote: > Has anyone compiled the postgres.so driver lately? I seem to recall > hearing that someone had updated it, but Web searches turn up nothing > except the same old code that I'm not having much luck with. I updated it to AOLserver 3, but that is probably not what you're after -- particularly since I did my testing under linux. > More specifically has anyone compiled it with gcc under Solaris 2.5 > against PostgreSQL 6.5.1? (OK, highly unlikely that many have installed > 6.5.1 yet, but hope springs eternal...) Anybody care to take a stab at > what the compiler and linker flags should be for gcc? Look in the makefile -- I think there was a set of options commented out for Solaris... > Here's what shows in the log: > Warning: Load of '/usr/local/AOLserver/bin/postgres.so' failed: ld.so.1: > bin/nsd: fatal: libpg.so: can't open file: errno=2 I can't find it because under 6.5.1 there is NO libpq.so.1 -- there is a libpq.so.2 instead, which is why you have to recompile from source. Good luck! Lamar Owen WGCR Internet Radio ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 2 Aug 1999 20:56:12 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Jin Choi Organization: ArsDigita, LLC Subject: Re: changing http status codes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Brad Chick wrote: > AOLServer 2.3.3 writes a status code of 0 to the access log for calls to > .tcl files. That makes it difficult to do any analysis of the log with a > log analysis tool (current favorite being analog). Is there a way to change > the status code that AOLServer returns in the case of .tcl scripts? > > Thanks > Brad Chick > Do It Sports That's not completely true, it only writes a status code of 0 if you are using ArsDigita's ReturnHeaders/ns_write method of writing out data (or something like it). We're moving away from that to always using ns_return, which takes a status code as an argument. -Jin ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 2 Aug 1999 20:55:28 -0500 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: "J. Michael Roberts" Subject: Re: PostgreSQL driver In-Reply-To: <37A6230C.16AEF5F5@wgcr.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII > "J. Michael Roberts" wrote: > > Has anyone compiled the postgres.so driver lately? I seem to recall > > hearing that someone had updated it, but Web searches turn up nothing > > except the same old code that I'm not having much luck with. > > I updated it to AOLserver 3, but that is probably not what you're after > -- particularly since I did my testing under linux. Did you compile with gcc? What changes, if any, were necessary for AS3? That API is the same, and the differing versions of Tcl shouldn't affect things really at all, I'd think. > > More specifically has anyone compiled it with gcc under Solaris 2.5 > > against PostgreSQL 6.5.1? (OK, highly unlikely that many have installed > > 6.5.1 yet, but hope springs eternal...) Anybody care to take a stab at > > what the compiler and linker flags should be for gcc? > > Look in the makefile -- I think there was a set of options commented out > for Solaris... Actually, for the native Solaris compiler. A mark of its extreme age... > > Here's what shows in the log: > > Warning: Load of '/usr/local/AOLserver/bin/postgres.so' failed: ld.so.1: > > bin/nsd: fatal: libpg.so: can't open file: errno=2 > > I can't find it because under 6.5.1 there is NO libpq.so.1 -- there is a > libpq.so.2 instead, which is why you have to recompile from source. Well, it's attempting to link to libpq.so (I miscopied the error message above), which is soft-linked to libsq.so.2, so that shouldn't be a problem if I understand the situation correctly. Sigh. > Good luck! Yeah. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 00:16:42 -0400 Reply-To: philg@mit.edu Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Philip Greenspun Subject: poster children for Sun Microsystems Comments: cc: jim@rubylane.com, michael@cleverly.com In-Reply-To: <199908030407.AAA00990@services.web.aol.com> (message from Automatic digest processor on Tue, 3 Aug 1999 00:03:14 -0400) Date: Sun, 1 Aug 1999 23:01:19 -0700 From: jim@rubylane.com Subject: Re: Simultaneous DB access crashes AOLserver 2.3.3 ... We ended up (and are still) running the dual CPU machine with the 2nd processor disabled. :( We are still having random server issues, but they are less frequent than when both CPUs were enabled. Our outstanding problems with AOLServer are: 1. TCL's [exec function sometimes hangs, sometimes chewing up CPU time in sched_yield. I hacked our kernel after talking to the pthreads library guru - there's a patch to put in the Linux exec function so that signal info is "privatized" during exec. It makes things much better, to the point of being impossible for me to duplicate the problem in a test environment, but execs still sometimes hang for us in production. 2. Our servers randomly reboot about 3 times/week. I have tried to get them to core dump (special startup script that sets the core dump ulimit to unlimited), but they won't. 3. We have to kill our server once a day because there appear to be memory leaks. Server memory usage gradually creeps up until it is using over 100MB. 4. Sometimes during server reboots, the log says "restarting server" and then it hangs - no zombie processes. 5. Sometimes during server reboots, the server hangs with outstanding zombie processes. We have written all kinds of server monitoring and "kicking" routines that do periodic ps/http get commands and kill the server if there is no response. .... If I didn't know better, I would think that you guys were salesmen for Sun Microsystems. This does not make Linux sound like a great way to save a few bucks! Philip who has a nice quiet life running Solaris and HP-UX ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 2 Aug 1999 22:09:56 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: jim@rubylane.com Subject: Re: poster children for Sun Microsystems Comments: To: philg@mit.edu Comments: cc: michael@cleverly.com In-Reply-To: <199908030416.AAA19036@baden.ai.mit.edu> from "Philip Greenspun" at Aug 3, 99 00:16:42 am Content-Type: text C'mon Phil - I've used the commercial Unixes at a large auto mfgr. The patch lists were so huge, we had to write/buy special applications just to manage them. I'm glad your life with Solaris is quiet - I guess you guys installed that patch that eBay forgot - the one that took their (Solaris) database server down for a day. :) Personally, I don't use Linux because it's cheap. I use it because when something goes wrong - which it always will with any configuration - I have half a chance of understanding what is happening and gettinto help me fix it. And I think the people working on Linux are very dedicated to "doing the right thing", something sometimes missing from the commercial Unix vendors' mentality. I have done contract projects for the commercial Unix vendors, and I can't tell you how many times I have had to argue with one of their developers to "do the right thing". We had a hard time getting fixes in a timely fashion from the commercial Unix vendors. If a huge company can'twhy would I have any expectation that a small fry like me can get it? Jim > > .... > > > If I didn't know better, I would think that you guys were salesmen for > Sun Microsystems. This does not make Linux sound like a great way to > save a few bucks! > > Philip > who has a nice quiet life running Solaris and HP-UX > ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 13:16:47 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Lamar Owen Organization: WGCR Internet Radio Subject: Re: PostgreSQL driver Comments: cc: gnachman@aol.net MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit "J. Michael Roberts" wrote: > What changes, if any, were necessary for AS3? That API is the same, and > the differing versions of Tcl shouldn't affect things really at all, I'd > think. The difference is in the utter lack of support for ExtendedTableInfo and kindred API calls -- three of which (DbFn_GetTableInfo, DbFn_TableList, and DbFn_BestRowId) are directly implemented in the db driver. Those three routines have to be #ifdef's out due to symbols in the routines that are undefined in AOLserver 3. Also, AOLserver3 consolidates the header files into one big ns.h instead of all the little ones. > > > what the compiler and linker flags should be for gcc? For gcc under Solaris....I don't know. For gcc (actually, egcs, but that's nearly the same animal, as the same makefile works under RedHat 5.2, which still uses gcc 2.7.2 by default) under linux: # Linux RedHat 6.0 CC=cc COPTS= -rdynamic -DAOLSERVER3 -D_REENTRANT -D__linux__ -D__linux_libc6__ -fpic -I/usr/include/pgsql LDFLAGS=-shared -lcrypt -lpq (this is for a build for AOLserver3 -- for 2.3, remove the -DAOLSERVER3) Possibly just removing the linux-specific defines will work -- browse the header files and see if any other symbols are defined. You may need to define "CC=gcc" -- I didn't have to thanks to gcc being the default linux compiler. So, you may be able to get away with a COPTS= -rdynamic -D_REENTRANT -fpic -I${PGHOME}/include -- your LDFLAGS may well be different -- but the -shared and -lpg switches are likely to be necessary. Since AOLserver is autoconfed, and PostgreSQL is autoconfed, you may want to look at the makefiles produced by a postgresql configure session for ideas. The makefile I used is at http://www.ramifordistat.net/aolserver3/postgres if you want to look at it, along with the source code for a version of postgres.c that will compile for either AOLserver 3 or 2 -- according to the AOLSERVER3 #define. > > > > Look in the makefile -- I think there was a set of options commented out > > for Solaris... > > Actually, for the native Solaris compiler. A mark of its extreme age... The fact that it links to an ancient libpq is also a mark of its age -- not to mention the fact that it wants _Postgres95_ -- which hasn't been the official title since 1996. > Well, it's attempting to link to libpq.so (I miscopied the error message > above), which is soft-linked to libsq.so.2, so that shouldn't be a problem > if I understand the situation correctly. Sigh. The version distributed in binary specifically links to libpq.so.1 -- I had the same issue until I recompiled -- IOW, even with libpq.so hard linked to libpq.so.2, the AOLserver dbdrv loader barfed, saying that it couldn't find libpq.so.1 -- now, you MAY be able to hard link libpq.so.2 to libpq.so.1, but be prepared for wierd stuff if you do. Hey George Nachman, just which version of Postgres ARE you linking against?? HTH Lamar Owen WGCR Internet Radio ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 11:51:33 -0500 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Aaron Swartz Subject: No Longer Parsing TCL Files Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit I installed AOLserver 3.0b2 today, but it seems to have stopped parsing .tcl files. I know this feature wasn't taken out because there are example TCL files included with the build, so what happened? I have searched the documentation and have found no mention of this change, or how to correct it. Is this a bug, or is there a parameter I'm missing. I subscribe to the digest so please CC: responses to me. Aaron Swartz | |Digital Nuclear Bomb to hit Echelon |Cracking RC5 without NSA Help ICQ: 33158237 | AIM: Jedi of Pi |Tapping Civillian Communications ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 14:29:24 -0500 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Rob Mayoff Subject: Re: No Longer Parsing TCL Files In-Reply-To: <199908031712.NAA06872@services.web.aol.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII | I installed AOLserver 3.0b2 today, but it seems to have stopped parsing .tcl | files. I know this feature wasn't taken out because there are example TCL | files included with the build, so what happened? I have searched the | documentation and have found no mention of this change, or how to correct | it. Is this a bug, or is there a parameter I'm missing. This was answered at aolserver.lcs.mit.edu already. For the benefit of mailing-list-only readers, the answer is that Tcl page support was removed from AS3. I have written a module which recreates the feature. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 16:26:32 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: George Nachman Subject: Re: PostgreSQL driver Comments: To: Lamar Owen In-Reply-To: <37A723FF.15C30FA2@wgcr.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Tue, 3 Aug 1999, Lamar Owen wrote: > The version distributed in binary specifically links to libpq.so.1 -- I > had the same issue until I recompiled -- IOW, even with libpq.so hard > linked to libpq.so.2, the AOLserver dbdrv loader barfed, saying that it > couldn't find libpq.so.1 -- now, you MAY be able to hard link libpq.so.2 > to libpq.so.1, but be prepared for wierd stuff if you do. > > Hey George Nachman, just which version of Postgres ARE you linking > against?? > The code in beta2 was tested with PostgreSQL 6.4--I don't remember which version of libpq that was, though. --George ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 22:55:28 +0200 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Ray Davis Subject: Re: PostgreSQL driver Comments: To: "J. Michael Roberts" In-Reply-To: "J. Michael Roberts"'s message of Mon, 02 Aug 1999 15:48:42 CDT. > Has anyone compiled the postgres.so driver lately? I seem to recall > hearing that someone had updated it, but Web searches turn up nothing > except the same old code that I'm not having much luck with. > > More specifically has anyone compiled it with gcc under Solaris 2.5 > against PostgreSQL 6.5.1? (OK, highly unlikely that many have installed > 6.5.1 yet, but hope springs eternal...) Anybody care to take a stab at > what the compiler and linker flags should be for gcc? I recently built: PostgreSQL 6.5.0 on i386-pc-solaris2.6, compiled by gcc 2.8.1 (according to psql ;)) and a postgres.so which works okay with aolserver 2.3.3 (although we do all our table creation and loading outside of aolserver. Below is a context diff against the original makefile. You'll have to make NSHOME and the paths to your postgres installation different. Cheers, Ray =============================================================================== $ diff -c ../../examples/c/postgres/makefile . *** ../../examples/c/postgres/makefile Fri Jan 29 20:34:24 1999 --- ./makefile Tue Jun 29 01:18:37 1999 *************** *** 21,28 **** # # Location of the AOLserver files (normally the ~nsadmin directory): ! NSHOME=../../../ # Solaris 2.4 #CC=/opt/SUNWspro/bin/cc #COPTS=-g -mt -Xa --- 21,32 ---- # # Location of the AOLserver files (normally the ~nsadmin directory): ! NSHOME=../.. + CC=gcc + COPTS= -D__unix__ -D__sun4__ -I$(NSHOME)/pthreads/include -I$(NSHOME)/include -fpic -Wall -I/db0/postgres/include + LDFLAGS= -L/db0/postgres/lib -shared -lpq + # Solaris 2.4 #CC=/opt/SUNWspro/bin/cc #COPTS=-g -mt -Xa *************** *** 53,59 **** all: $(MODULE) $(MODULE): $(OBJS) ! ld $(LDFLAGS) -o $(MODULE) $(OBJS) install: $(MODULE) cp $(MODULE) $(NSHOME)/bin/ --- 57,63 ---- all: $(MODULE) $(MODULE): $(OBJS) ! gcc $(LDFLAGS) -o $(MODULE) $(OBJS) install: $(MODULE) cp $(MODULE) $(NSHOME)/bin/ =============================================================================== ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 17:06:57 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Michael Atlas Subject: nsd.ini MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello- I am having trouble starting the server on my Sun Ultra1 running Solaris 2.6; The documentation says to run ./nsd -c nsd.ini but I can't find(or figure out how to generate) the nsd.ini file. Is there some install script or generation program that I'm missing? Thanks! -mike -- Mike Atlas 703.276.3300(v) Systems Engineer 703.276.3333(f) iXL, Inc. www.ixl.com ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 18:52:41 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Lamar Owen Organization: WGCR Internet Radio Subject: Re: PostgreSQL driver MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit George Nachman wrote: > On Tue, 3 Aug 1999, Lamar Owen wrote: > > Hey George Nachman, just which version of Postgres ARE you linking > > against?? > > > > The code in beta2 was tested with PostgreSQL 6.4--I don't remember > which version of libpq that was, though. > > --George 6.4 is libpq version 2 -- however, I was referring to the 2.3 binaries. As I prefer to compile my own AOLserver 3 tree, I haven't used the binaries of it as of yet, so I can't comment on them. I probably should have said WERE instead of ARE above. Sorry. Lamar ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 18:58:32 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Lamar Owen Organization: WGCR Internet Radio Subject: Re: nsd.ini MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Michael Atlas wrote: > > Hello- > I am having trouble starting the server on my Sun Ultra1 running Solaris > 2.6; > The documentation says to run ./nsd -c nsd.ini but I can't find(or > figure out how to generate) the nsd.ini file. Is there some install > script or generation program that I'm missing? Yes; bin/nsbootstrap. Referred to in the 2.3.x install documents at www.aolserver.com. This has been deprecated in the 3.0 server -- an nsd.tcl config file sample is shipped with it, since the setup server that bootstrap relies on is no longer available in 3. Lamar Owen WGCR Internet Radio ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 11:42:23 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: George Nachman Subject: Re: AOLSERVER Digest - 2 Aug 1999 to 3 Aug 1999 In-Reply-To: <199908040403.AAA11583@services.web.aol.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Wed, 4 Aug 1999, Automatic digest processor wrote: > > George Nachman wrote: > > On Tue, 3 Aug 1999, Lamar Owen wrote: > > > Hey George Nachman, just which version of Postgres ARE you linking > > > against?? > > > > > > > The code in beta2 was tested with PostgreSQL 6.4--I don't remember > > which version of libpq that was, though. > > > > --George > > 6.4 is libpq version 2 -- however, I was referring to the 2.3 binaries. > As I prefer to compile my own AOLserver 3 tree, I haven't used the > binaries of it as of yet, so I can't comment on them. I probably should > have said WERE instead of ARE above. Sorry. > > Lamar Unfortunately, we no longer have the source for the postgres we linked with--only a binary that gives no indication of its version. It's definetly not recent (I think it was from back when it was still called Postgres, not Postgres95 or PostgreSQL). The moral of the story is to use AOLserver 3! --George ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 10:53:19 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: "Kriston J. Rehberg" Subject: Re: poster children for Sun Microsystems In-Reply-To: <119377074@toto.iv> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I have to side with Phil on this. The very fact that you can download patches and bring your system completely up-to-date in under an hour is one super advantage of Solaris and other big-money systems over Linux (or *BSD). Not to mention the kernel threads that Linux doesn't offer... Kris -- Kriston J. Rehberg America Online, Inc. http://kriston.net/ ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 10:15:10 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Michael Atlas Subject: rolling files MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I am having another problem: I am used to a web server running as nobody, so that's what I told the setup server to run the site as. But when I try to do anything that changes the nsd.ini file, it gives an error: [04/Aug/1999:10:11:41 -0400][26906.9][nssetup] Error: Ns_RollFile: rename(/opt/aolserver233/nsd.ini, /opt/aolserver233/nsd.ini.000) failed: Permission denied [04/Aug/1999:10:11:41 -0400][26906.9][nssetup] Error: Tcl script failed for POST /NS/Setup/SetupVS/Update, User-Agent: Mozilla/4.61 [en] (WinNT; U), PeerAddress: 207.197.241.189 [04/Aug/1999:10:11:41 -0400][26906.9][nssetup] Notice: 492 bytes of raw data to follow: could not roll file. while executing "ns_rollfile $configfile $maxbackup" (procedure "cf_writeconfig" line 9) invoked from within "cf_writeconfig" (procedure "cf_update" line 15) invoked from within "cf_update $conn $form "AOLserver Setup Server Parameters Updated" {}" invoked from within "return [cf_update $conn $form "AOLserver Setup Server Parameters Updated" {}]..." (procedure "cf_setupvsupdate" line 11) invoked from within "cf_setupvsupdate cns0 {}" It looks like it's trying to back up the old ini file but the permissions are wrong. Is that correct? Should I be using "nobody" to run the server? What does "nobody" need to own and what does root need to own to make this work correctly? Thanks again in advance. -mike -- Mike Atlas 703.276.3300(v) Systems Engineer 703.276.3333(f) iXL, Inc. www.ixl.com ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 12:32:44 -0500 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: "J. Michael Roberts" Subject: Re: poster children for Sun Microsystems In-Reply-To: <14248.21471.94139.181981@mowmow.office.aol.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sheesh, not that this is off-topic or anything, but all the easily installed patching in the world won't help if Sun hasn't made a patch available, and that was the original point. Sun can't *produce* a patch in an hour, whereas the Linux community sometimes can. Just my $0.02 in the holy war... (And yes, I run Solaris.) On Wed, 4 Aug 1999, Kriston J. Rehberg wrote: > I have to side with Phil on this. The very fact that you can download > patches and bring your system completely up-to-date in under an hour > is one super advantage of Solaris and other big-money systems over > Linux (or *BSD). Not to mention the kernel threads that Linux doesn't > offer... > > Kris > > -- > Kriston J. Rehberg > America Online, Inc. http://kriston.net/ > ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 15:21:58 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Lamar Owen Organization: WGCR Internet Radio Subject: Re: poster children for Sun Microsystems MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit "Kriston J. Rehberg" wrote: > > I have to side with Phil on this. The very fact that you can download > patches and bring your system completely up-to-date in under an hour > is one super advantage of Solaris and other big-money systems over > Linux (or *BSD). Not to mention the kernel threads that Linux doesn't > offer... > > Kris With {RedHat|Caldera|Mandrake|SuSE|etc}, you can do that just as easily. With FreeBSD, you can do it even easier. Wait a minute, I thought kernel threads were now supported.... The fact of the matter is that the Linux patches will usually be available within hours of initial problems -- as yet, the commercial folks haven't gotten that fast. Linux can be supported -- HP, for a monthly charge, will fully support you. For yet another charge, RedHat will support you. The arguments for commercial *nix are getting slimmer. The biggest one right now is the scalability to large SMP servers, and the other enterprise management functions commercial *nix vendors provide -- but, you can buy CA Unicenter TNG for Linux.... I have run both commercial (Apollo Domain, before the HP acquisition, Tandy Xenix, AT&T 3B SVR2) and free (386BSD and Linux since version 0.13). The linux boxen have been more stable and better supported than any of the others, in my limited experience. YMMV. Linux currently is certainly not the be-all/end-all of *nix -- there is no such animal. However, it does its job well -- and, under glibc 2.1, AOLserver doesn't zombie out anymore. IME. Lamar Owen WGCR Internet Radio ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 15:30:39 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Lamar Owen Organization: WGCR Internet Radio Subject: Re: rolling files MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Michael Atlas wrote: > It looks like it's trying to back up the old ini file but the > permissions are wrong. Is that correct? Should I be using "nobody" to > run the server? What does "nobody" need to own and what does root need > to own to make this work correctly? > Thanks again in advance. You can certainly use 'nobody' to run the server -- personally, I don't, but that's just personal. You will need to set up the directory the log files live in to be owned by 'nobody', rwx. The log files themselves will need to be owned by 'nobody', rw. HTH. Lamar Owen WGCR Internet Radio ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 16:42:59 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Lamar Owen Organization: WGCR Internet Radio Subject: Re: AOLSERVER Digest - 2 Aug 1999 to 3 Aug 1999 MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit George Nachman wrote: > Unfortunately, we no longer have the source for the postgres we linked > with--only a binary that gives no indication of its version. It's > definetly not recent (I think it was from back when it was still called > Postgres, not Postgres95 or PostgreSQL). Eeeewwwwwww..... No WONDER it had problems.... The fact that it still worked, up to a point, is a miracle, as the previous Postgres would have been 4.2 -- pre-SQL. > The moral of the story is to use AOLserver 3! > > --George ;-) I'm working on getting my production stuff moved over to adp's, but time is limited. Personally, once I got over the culture shock of the changes, it was fun to get down to business of converting. One of the things I'm working on is a startup script that will iterate over the nsd.tcl and automatically start all defined servers, and I'm working on RPM packaging for RedHat -- with a release to be coincident with the official non-beta 3.0, hopefully. Lamar Owen WGCR Internet Radio ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 5 Aug 1999 02:48:10 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Jeff Huber Subject: glibc.2.0.x sucks was Re: Simultaneous DB access crashes AOLserver 2.3.3 Comments: cc: jim@rubylane.com, programmers@am.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jim, Upgrade you glibc! I've seen this particular problem of "can't resolve symbol xx" posted on this mailing list several times, on the photo.net Web/Db discussion, and the AOLserver Development forums. It is most often seen in loading the Solid Db driver, but I've also seen it in loading just about any shared object (nsperm.so, nsssle.so, oracle driver, etc.). It is more prevalent with a 2.2 kernel and AOLserver 3.0. Edmund Lian suggested upgrading glibc to 2.1. I was browsing the GNU glibc problem tracker and came across this problem report: http://www-gnats.gnu.org:8080/cgi-bin/wwwgnats.pl/full/753. It turns out this is a known problem with glibc 2.0 and fixed in 2.1 (back in October 1998). I've upgraded the glibc here and it has completely fixed the problem. I browsed GNU's site a little more and read somewhere that glibc 2.0 was suppose to be "experimental". Ya, I guess that's why every Linux distribution was shipping it. When upgrading make sure to also grab George's solid driver compiled with glibc2.1. The one that comes with glibc2.1 AS 2.3.3 doesn't work. Let us know how it goes. jim@rubylane.com wrote: > > Our outstanding problems with AOLServer are: > > > > 6. We run two servers on each machine. One is for background jobs and > runs at a lower prioity. Sometimes during server reboots, one server > starts fine, the other gets all kinds of shared library problems, like > "can't resolve symbol blah". The specific symbol changes and appears > totally random - sometimes in the Solid DB library nssolid.so, > sometimes in the permission library, ... Once this happens it can be > very difficult to get the server to start. Shutting both down, taking > them out of inittab, killing them, and then enabling them one at a time > again often works. But we have also had to reboot to get them to both > start. It seems more like a Linux shared library problem to me, but > not sure. > > -- ---------------------------------------------- | Jeff Huber | Web Applications Developer | | jeff@am.net | AM.net - http://am.net | ---------------------------------------------- ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 5 Aug 1999 10:58:56 EDT Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Jim Davidson Subject: Re: poster children for Sun Microsystems MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 8/4/99 11:43:29 PM Eastern Daylight Time, LISTSERV@SERVICES.WEB.AOL.COM writes: > > I have to side with Phil on this. The very fact that you can download > > patches and bring your system completely up-to-date in under an hour > > is one super advantage of Solaris and other big-money systems over > > Linux (or *BSD). Not to mention the kernel threads that Linux doesn't > > offer... > > > > Kris > > With {RedHat|Caldera|Mandrake|SuSE|etc}, you can do that just as > easily. With FreeBSD, you can do it even easier. > > Wait a minute, I thought kernel threads were now supported.... > > The fact of the matter is that the Linux patches will usually be > available within hours of initial problems -- as yet, the commercial > folks haven't gotten that fast. > > Linux can be supported -- HP, for a monthly charge, will fully support > you. For yet another charge, RedHat will support you. > > The arguments for commercial *nix are getting slimmer. The biggest one > right now is the scalability to large SMP servers, and the other > enterprise management functions commercial *nix vendors provide -- but, > you can buy CA Unicenter TNG for Linux.... > > I have run both commercial (Apollo Domain, before the HP acquisition, > Tandy Xenix, AT&T 3B SVR2) and free (386BSD and Linux since version > 0.13). The linux boxen have been more stable and better supported than > any of the others, in my limited experience. YMMV. > > Linux currently is certainly not the be-all/end-all of *nix -- there is > no such animal. However, it does its job well -- and, under glibc 2.1, > AOLserver doesn't zombie out anymore. IME. Hello, Yes, Linux has kernel threads implemented through the clone() system call. However, it's not exactly like Solaris where n threads are scheduled onto m "lwp" - light weight processes scheduled by the kernel as the clone()'ed processes on Linux. Some would say Solaris' "n to m" model is better than the Linux "n to n" module. I suspect for the AOLserver the benefit is slim to none - we run the SGI sproc() port of AOLserver at Digital City which has the same "n to n" model as Linux and it runs well and is easy to debug. FYI: FreeBSD does not have kernel threads and uses an "n to 1" user-level thread model which almost everyone would agree is bad for high traffic sites. Otherwise, while I do agree it's quite nice to have the source to Linux which allows you to better understand what's going on and perhaps provide an opportunity to fix things I must say that I've observed the Linux pthread interface is not very robust. AOLserver pushes the thread interface pretty hard with a large degree of synchronization and multiple simultaneous I/O. Also, there are certain design decisions in the pthread library which seem a bit odd, e.g., sending a signal which caused a particular thread to crash (e.g., SIGSEGV) to all remaining threads and a somewhat sloppy implementation of the manager thread where full control data strucutures are sent through the pipe instead of a simple queue and wakeup message. In addition the manager thread must do a polling check for death of the parent because it does not use the new prctl() routine to enable sending a signal directly which leads at time to a single stuck clone() instead of full AOLserver shutdown. For comparison, our SGI sproc() port is somewhat more straightforward and more reliable under very similar constraints - check the thread/sproc.c code for details. Now, there's one more thing which would make me nervous and that would be running AOLserver on a multiple CPU Linux machine. First, the SMP kernel code in Linux is somewhat new so that may make some nervous. Second, I've looked at the pthread library code and I'm not sure if it's properly setting up memory barriers and such to ensure memory consistancy between the CPU memory caches. I could be totally wrong here, I just haven't had enough time to look at the code closely to convince myself everything is in order. I would suggest you look into that issue carefully before you re-enable the extra CPU. Bugs caused by inconsistant memory reads would be the worst debugging nightmare of your life. Again, everything could be just groovy but I don't know for sure. If you look into this issue I'd be very interested in what you find. -Jim ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 5 Aug 1999 16:12:01 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Lamar Owen Organization: WGCR Internet Radio Subject: Re: poster children for Sun Microsystems MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Jim Davidson wrote: > Otherwise, while I do agree it's quite nice to have the source to Linux which > allows you to better understand what's going on and perhaps provide an > opportunity to fix things I must say that I've observed the Linux pthread > interface is not very robust. AOLserver pushes the thread interface pretty > hard with a large degree of synchronization and multiple simultaneous I/O. AOLserver is/could be a test suite for the Linux pthreads people.... > Also, there are certain design decisions in the pthread library which seem a > bit odd Interesting -- I'm sure the linux people would be interested in hearing from a seasoned threads developer such as yourself who has far greater understanding of the issues involved than most -- you probably have forgotten more about pthreads than I have learned yet ;-).... Interestingly, this past week has seen discussion of some of these issues in the 2.3 kernel, in particular, having thread creation be more efficient. The Kernel Traffic archive has more info (kt.opensource.org , I believe). > Now, there's one more thing which would make me nervous and that would be > running AOLserver on a multiple CPU Linux machine. First, the SMP kernel This is, I believe, what prompted Philip's comment -- and scalability to multiple CPU's IS one of Linux's current weaknesses. I have an SMP machine -- just only one CPU installed, since the SMP support is slightly farkled. This is really not a great issue for me, as AOLserver on a single PPro 200 is easily capable of filling my piddly T1 with CPU to spare -- with RealServer running, a couple of live RealProducers, PostgreSQL, and Samba -- with an average bandwidth of 900-1200 Kbps to the Internet, at slightly over 20% CPU utilization, and a load average of 0.10 (and very long uptimes....). The libc version has a great deal to do with the stability of the AOLserver/Linux combination: libc5 is the worst, and glibc 2.1 the best, with glibc 2.0 (as Jeff said) doing pretty badly on other issues. > If you look into this issue I'd be very interested in > what you find. I'll leave that to people who are actually using SMP, as my speculation would be worse than the bugs. Thanks for the great, detailed reply -- enlightening. Lamar ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 5 Aug 1999 15:58:12 -0500 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: "Mike B." Subject: MySql Driver MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Has anyone written a MySql driver for AOLServer on the Linux platform? I am having some issues with Postgres, and I would like to look into alternative free databases. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks, # mike ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 6 Aug 1999 13:29:33 +0100 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Alan Byrne Subject: Re: MySql Driver MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >Has anyone written a MySql driver for AOLServer on the Linux platform? I am >having some issues with Postgres, and I would like to look into alternative >free databases. > >Any help would be appreciated. > >Thanks, > ># mike We have an external driver for MySQL written which we are testing at the moment. It should be clean enough for other people to play with in a few days when we have the memory leaks ironed out. Alan Byrne. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 10 Aug 1999 12:06:49 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Lamar Owen Organization: WGCR Internet Radio Subject: LinuxDev.Net poll of application server MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Linux Dev is conducting a poll of favorite application servers; and AOLserver is on the list! Let's make a good showing.... www.linuxdev.net Lamar Owen WGCR Internet Radio ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 10 Aug 1999 14:37:37 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: "Daniel P. Stasinski" Subject: Help with ClientDebug MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Can some explain exactly how the ClientDebug= feature works in AOLserver 2.3.3? How and where does one actually see the debug information? Thank you, 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: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 07:47:19 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: jim@rubylane.com Subject: Re: Help with ClientDebug In-Reply-To: <003301bee378$91306080$1ef084ce@karemor.com> from "Daniel P. Stasinski" at Aug 10, 99 02:37:37 pm Content-Type: text ClientDebug takes an IP address as an argument. If a TCL error occurs and the request came from this IP address, then instead of AOLServer displaying a very general server error message, it will display a TCL backtrace showing you where the error occurred. It's very useful, although would be even more useful if it went by authorized userid (like nsadmin) instead of IP address. That would handle dynamic IP addresses better. We have a wrapper around all of our TCL code to do this. Jim Wilcoxson www.rubylane.com > > Can some explain exactly how the ClientDebug= feature works in > AOLserver 2.3.3? How and where does one actually see the debug > information? > > Thank you, > > 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: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 17:28:23 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Jeff Huber Subject: test MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit test -- ---------------------------------------------- | Jeff Huber | Web Applications Developer | | jeff@am.net | AM.net - http://am.net | ---------------------------------------------- ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1999 16:52:47 -0600 Reply-To: Keith Paskett Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Keith Paskett Subject: Headers/Cookies from ADP's MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/plain; charset=us-ascii I am trying to set a cookie from an ADP (without much success). Actually the following at the top of my ADP does set the cookie. ns_set put [ns_conn outputheaders $conn] \ Set-Cookie "dataset=testit; path=/incident/;\n" However I get the following at the top of my page: MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1999 22:35:51 GMT Server: NaviServer/2.0 AOLserver/2.3.2 Content-Type: text/html Content-Length: 4003 I suspect this is because the headers are being written out a second time. Does anyone have a solution that works for setting cookies from an ADP? ------ Keith Paskett keith.paskett@SDL.USU.EDU Space Dynamics Laboratory PGP encrypted mail preferred 1695 North Research Parkway 435-797-4195 Logan, Utah 84341 http://cal.sdl.usu.edu/~paskett ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 22:08:37 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: colin roald Subject: questions Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii I hope this is the right place to ask confused user questions. I'm trying to get AOLserver 3.0 set up correctly. 1. Can anybody give me a copy of an nsd.tcl file that shows a working configuration of nsvhr? The docs are sketchy at best, and I can't seem to get it to do what I think it's supposed to. 2. Does AOLserver return a status code on startup, that I can test in a boot script? The docs don't say. 3. does kill -HUP force a re-read of nsd.tcl, or is nsd -k the preferred method? 4. Can anybody point me at a complete list of the HTTP status codes? It seems like such an obvious thing, but I can't find them. 200 is OK, and 404 is 'file not found', but what are all the others? Thanks in advance, -- colin | when i was young, i found out that the big toe always ends up making roald | a hole in the sock. so i stopped wearing socks. (albert einstein) ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1999 11:42:33 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Dominic Tracey Subject: ns_return vs. ReturnHeaders/ns_write MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit What are the various arguments for and against using the ArsDigita utilities.tcl ReturnHeaders and subsequent calls to ns_write as opposed to constructing a string and returning it in one fell swoop with ns_return? It was pointed out that the access logs don't show how many bytes are returned, are there any other issues with efficiency, browser compatibilities or any other differences that people have noticed? Dominic ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 12:46:51 -0500 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Rob Mayoff Subject: Re: Headers/Cookies from ADP's Comments: To: Keith Paskett In-Reply-To: <199908122251.QAA03430@hopsing.cal.sdl.usu.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII | I am trying to set a cookie from an ADP (without much success). | Actually the following at the top of my ADP does set the cookie. | | ns_set put [ns_conn outputheaders $conn] \ | Set-Cookie "dataset=testit; path=/incident/;\n" The "\n" at the end is probably the culprit. Ns_ConnConstructHeaders appends "\r\n" to each header automatically. Your "\n" is creating a blank line which terminates the message headers. Any headers output after your Set-Cookie header will be treated (by the browser) as part of the document. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 13:07:42 -0500 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Rob Mayoff Subject: Re: questions In-Reply-To: <19990811220837.A13221@Plage.Stanford.EDU> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII | 2. Does AOLserver return a status code on startup, that I can test in a | boot script? The docs don't say. Use the source, Luke. It returns 0 as soon as it has successfully forked. However, the fork happens before it even reads the config file, so it's not a very useful return code. | 3. does kill -HUP force a re-read of nsd.tcl, or is nsd -k the preferred | method? Use the source, Luke. SIGHUP does not force a reload. | 4. Can anybody point me at a complete list of the HTTP status codes? It | seems like such an obvious thing, but I can't find them. 200 is OK, | and 404 is 'file not found', but what are all the others? I usually look them up in my copy of "Webmaster in a Nutshell". However, using google.com, it wasn't hard to find . ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 14:49:27 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Lamar Owen Organization: WGCR Internet Radio Subject: Re: questions MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit colin roald wrote: > 4. Can anybody point me at a complete list of the HTTP status codes? It > seems like such an obvious thing, but I can't find them. 200 is OK, > and 404 is 'file not found', but what are all the others? From the analog init.c (analog is a webserver log analysis tool): Statuscodes scs[] = { {100, "100 Continue with request", 0, 0}, {101, "101 Switching protocols", 0, 0}, {199, " [Miscellaneous informational]", 0, 0}, {200, "200 OK", 0, 0}, {201, "201 Created", 0, 0}, {202, "202 Accepted for future processing", 0, 0}, {203, "203 Non-authoritative information", 0, 0}, {204, "204 OK, but nothing to send", 0, 0}, {205, "205 Reset document", 0, 0}, {206, "206 Partial content", 0, 0}, {299, " [Miscellaneous successes]", 0, 0}, {300, "300 Multiple documents available", 0, 0}, {301, "301 Document moved permanently", 0, 0}, {302, "302 Document found elsewhere", 0, 0}, {303, "303 See other document", 0, 0}, {304, "304 Not modified since last retrieval", 0, 0}, {305, "305 Use proxy", 0, 0}, {306, "306 Switch proxy", 0, 0}, {307, "307 Document moved temporarily", 0, 0}, {399, " [Miscellaneous redirections]", 0, 0}, {400, "400 Bad request", 0, 0}, {401, "401 Authentication required", 0, 0}, {402, "402 Payment required", 0, 0}, {403, "403 Access forbidden", 0, 0}, {404, "404 Document not found", 0, 0}, {405, "405 Method not allowed", 0, 0}, {406, "406 Document not acceptable to client", 0, 0}, {407, "407 Proxy authentication required", 0, 0}, {408, "408 Request timeout", 0, 0}, {409, "409 Request conflicts with state of resource", 0, 0}, {410, "410 Document gone permanently", 0, 0}, {411, "411 Length required", 0, 0}, {412, "412 Precondition failed", 0, 0}, {413, "413 Request too long", 0, 0}, {414, "414 Requested filename too long", 0, 0}, {415, "415 Unsupported media type", 0, 0}, {416, "416 Requested range not valid", 0, 0}, {417, "417 Failed", 0, 0}, {418, "418 Failed", 0, 0}, {419, "419 Expectation failed", 0, 0}, {499, " [Miscellaneous client/user errors]", 0, 0}, {500, "500 Internal server error", 0, 0}, {501, "501 Request type not supported", 0, 0}, {502, "502 Error at upstream server", 0, 0}, {503, "503 Service temporarily unavailable", 0, 0}, {504, "504 Gateway timeout", 0, 0}, {505, "505 HTTP version not supported", 0, 0}, {506, "506 Redirection failed", 0, 0}, {599, " [Miscellaneous server errors]", 0, 0}, {600, "Dummy to signal end of list", 0, 0} }; Of course, the re is no HTTP result code of 600.... Now, as to what each of these codes means... I refer you to the excellent O'Reilly Nutshell handbook "Webmaster in a Nutshell," where all of these codes are expounded upon -- although there are codes in the above list from analog that are not in WiaN. The MIME specification may have a better list -- I forget off the top of my head which RFC that is, though. HTH Lamar Owen WGCR Internet Radio ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 10:21:41 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Kerry Barlow Subject: IP numbers cost and IP masking Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Hi all: I want to change ISP's soon. In my one dog town there are not many options,one of the companies wants to charge me $5 /month for additional IP numbers for my customers. This not only seems excessive but illegal to me. What is the theory behind this ,does anyone know? Is this a scam? Also if I wind up paying the $5 I have been told that IE4 has IP masking so that multiple DNS names can share the same IP number on 1 machine.(I dont see how this works) Do any of the later versions of AOL server do a similar process? I am not certain how IE4 does this of course. I would save the $5 month charge if I had such an option on AOLserver Currently I use version 2.1 for NT of AOLserver Thankyou to everyone Sincerely Kerry Admin@MntnWeb.Com WWW server hosting Http://mntnweb.com Binghamton online Webcam Http://MntnWeb.Com/bing.htm CHRISTMAS Web Page Http://mntnweb.com/xmas.htm ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 10:33:15 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: jim@rubylane.com Subject: Re: IP numbers cost and IP masking In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19990819142141.00a9e66c@servtech.com> from "Kerry Barlow" at Aug 19, 99 10:21:41 am Content-Type: text Kerry - it sounds like a scam to me. ISP's do have to file a "network plan" to justify their IP number usage, so some places will charge you a setup fee and possible make you write the plan. But if it's $5/mo per IP address, that sounds very high. Above Net charges us $30 one-time to get additional IP addresses - as many as we can justify. The other topic you mention - using multiple domain names with one IP address - is virtual hosting. This works in almost all modern browsers, even going back to Netscape 3. The browser sends a special header with every request: Host: www.domainname.com So even though you are serving 100 different domains from one IP address, the web server can look at this header and tell which domain name (and document root) you want to use. I don't think 2.1 supports virtual hosting - later versions do. But you can sort of fake it by using ns_register_proc, trapping all requests, looking up the Host: header, and then serving the files from the appropriate domain document directory with ns_returnfile. (Iff ns_register_proc is in 2.1 - not sure). Jim www.rubylane.com > > Hi all: I want to change ISP's soon. In my one dog town there are not many > options,one of the companies wants to charge me $5 /month for additional IP > numbers for my customers. This not only seems excessive but illegal to me. > What is the theory behind this ,does anyone know? Is this a scam? > Also if I wind up paying the $5 I have been told that IE4 has IP masking so > that multiple DNS names can share the same IP number on 1 machine.(I dont > see how this works) Do any of the later versions of AOL server do a similar > process? I am not certain how IE4 does this of course. I would save the $5 > month charge if I had such an option on AOLserver > Currently I use version 2.1 for NT of AOLserver > Thankyou to everyone > > > Sincerely > Kerry > Admin@MntnWeb.Com > WWW server hosting > Http://mntnweb.com > Binghamton online Webcam Http://MntnWeb.Com/bing.htm > CHRISTMAS Web Page Http://mntnweb.com/xmas.htm > ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 13:03:15 -0500 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: "J. Michael Roberts" Subject: Re: IP numbers cost and IP masking In-Reply-To: <19990819173315.31179.qmail@london.rubylane.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII > The other topic you mention - using multiple domain names with one IP > address - is virtual hosting. This works in almost all modern browsers, > even going back to Netscape 3. The browser sends a special header with > every request: > > Host: www.domainname.com > > So even though you are serving 100 different domains from one IP address, > the web server can look at this header and tell which domain name (and > document root) you want to use. > > I don't think 2.1 supports virtual hosting - later versions do. But you > can sort of fake it by using ns_register_proc, trapping all requests, > looking up the Host: header, and then serving the files from the > appropriate domain document directory with ns_returnfile. (Iff > ns_register_proc is in 2.1 - not sure). FWIW, I'm doing virtual hosting on 2.1 with some home-brewed code that basically would almost certainly not suit your purposes -- but it works. And it works exactly as Jim describes. (Yes, the ns_register_proc dates *way* back, it's the whole raison d'etre of AOLserver.) There is a virtual hosting module (ns_virthost? Anybody?) under newer AOLservers, 2.3 I guess, and I don't know what its status is under 3.0. But if it's open under 3.0, I'd be interested in retrofitting it under 2.1 (because I *still* can't switch for a while but my homebrew code makes me nervous.) Just my $.02. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 14:35:23 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Greg Saliba Subject: Y2K issues MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII I have a question for you people. I am running AOLserver 2.3 on a Sun Solaris box with Illustra 3.2 as the database. I rolled the date on the Sun to 2000 and everything seemed ok until I tried using the database pools. That is when I got this error [19/Aug/2000:13:58:05 -0700][26331.25229][localsystem] Notice: 267 bytes of raw data to follow: could not allocate 1 handle(s) from pool "pool_name" while executing "ns_db gethandle "pool_name"" invoked from within "set db [ns_db gethandle "pool_name"]..." (procedure "running_procedure" line 3) invoked from within "running_procedure cns2641 {}" Does anyone know what this means? I was under the impression bot Illustra and AOLserver where Y2k compliant. Any help in this matter would be greatly appreciated. Thanks. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 18:29:56 -0500 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: "J. Michael Roberts" Subject: Re: Y2K issues In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Well, I wouldn't automatically chalk that up to Y2K. In fact, I get that plenty when I shoot myself in the foot *whap* I mean, try an unconventional flow of control. If the particular HTTP transaction has already allocated a db handle, you'll get that if it trys to allocate another (prevents deadlock: you have to allocate all your handles at once.) On Thu, 19 Aug 1999, Greg Saliba wrote: > I have a question for you people. I am running AOLserver 2.3 on a Sun > Solaris box with Illustra 3.2 as the database. I rolled the date on the > Sun to 2000 and everything seemed ok until I tried using the database > pools. That is when I got this error > > [19/Aug/2000:13:58:05 -0700][26331.25229][localsystem] Notice: 267 > bytes > of raw data to follow: > could not allocate 1 handle(s) from pool "pool_name" > while executing > "ns_db gethandle "pool_name"" > invoked from within > "set db [ns_db gethandle "pool_name"]..." > (procedure "running_procedure" line 3) > invoked from within > "running_procedure cns2641 {}" > > Does anyone know what this means? I was under the impression bot Illustra > and AOLserver where Y2k compliant. Any help in this matter would be > greatly appreciated. > > Thanks. > ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 18:56:07 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: jim@rubylane.com Subject: Re: Y2K issues In-Reply-To: from "J. Michael Roberts" at Aug 19, 99 06:29:56 pm Content-Type: text Look in your server log where the web server first starts too. (BTW, is the Illustra server running?) If the database initialization fails, you'll get this error when you try to alloc a handle. > > Well, I wouldn't automatically chalk that up to Y2K. In fact, I get that > plenty when I shoot myself in the foot *whap* I mean, try an > unconventional flow of control. If the particular HTTP transaction has > already allocated a db handle, you'll get that if it trys to allocate > another (prevents deadlock: you have to allocate all your handles at > once.) > > On Thu, 19 Aug 1999, Greg Saliba wrote: > > > I have a question for you people. I am running AOLserver 2.3 on a Sun > > Solaris box with Illustra 3.2 as the database. I rolled the date on the > > Sun to 2000 and everything seemed ok until I tried using the database > > pools. That is when I got this error > > > > [19/Aug/2000:13:58:05 -0700][26331.25229][localsystem] Notice: 267 > > bytes > > of raw data to follow: > > could not allocate 1 handle(s) from pool "pool_name" > > while executing > > "ns_db gethandle "pool_name"" > > invoked from within > > "set db [ns_db gethandle "pool_name"]..." > > (procedure "running_procedure" line 3) > > invoked from within > > "running_procedure cns2641 {}" > > > > Does anyone know what this means? I was under the impression bot Illustra > > and AOLserver where Y2k compliant. Any help in this matter would be > > greatly appreciated. > > > > Thanks. > > > ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 22:09:12 -0500 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: "J. Michael Roberts" Subject: Re: Y2K issues In-Reply-To: <19990820015608.31636.qmail@london.rubylane.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Ah, yeah, I forgot that case. I knew there was another... On Thu, 19 Aug 1999 jim@rubylane.com wrote: > Look in your server log where the web server first starts too. (BTW, is > the Illustra server running?) If the database initialization fails, you'll > get this error when you try to alloc a handle. > > > > > Well, I wouldn't automatically chalk that up to Y2K. In fact, I get that > > plenty when I shoot myself in the foot *whap* I mean, try an > > unconventional flow of control. If the particular HTTP transaction has > > already allocated a db handle, you'll get that if it trys to allocate > > another (prevents deadlock: you have to allocate all your handles at > > once.) > > > > On Thu, 19 Aug 1999, Greg Saliba wrote: > > > > > I have a question for you people. I am running AOLserver 2.3 on a Sun > > > Solaris box with Illustra 3.2 as the database. I rolled the date on the > > > Sun to 2000 and everything seemed ok until I tried using the database > > > pools. That is when I got this error > > > > > > [19/Aug/2000:13:58:05 -0700][26331.25229][localsystem] Notice: 267 > > > bytes > > > of raw data to follow: > > > could not allocate 1 handle(s) from pool "pool_name" > > > while executing > > > "ns_db gethandle "pool_name"" > > > invoked from within > > > "set db [ns_db gethandle "pool_name"]..." > > > (procedure "running_procedure" line 3) > > > invoked from within > > > "running_procedure cns2641 {}" > > > > > > Does anyone know what this means? I was under the impression bot Illustra > > > and AOLserver where Y2k compliant. Any help in this matter would be > > > greatly appreciated. > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 09:45:20 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: James Smallacombe Subject: IP numbers cost Re: AOLSERVER Digest - 18 Aug 1999 to 19 Aug 1999 In-Reply-To: <199908200410.AAA02564@services.web.aol.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII > Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 10:21:41 -0400 > From: Kerry Barlow > Subject: IP numbers cost and IP masking > > Hi all: I want to change ISP's soon. In my one dog town there are not many > options,one of the companies wants to charge me $5 /month for additional IP > numbers for my customers. This not only seems excessive but illegal to me. > What is the theory behind this ,does anyone know? Is this a scam? No, it's pretty much par for the course. IP addresses are a limited resource and cost either your ISP or their upstream money. See http://www.arin.net for details. > Also if I wind up paying the $5 I have been told that IE4 has IP masking so > that multiple DNS names can share the same IP number on 1 machine.(I dont > see how this works) Do any of the later versions of AOL server do a similar > process? I am not certain how IE4 does this of course. I would save the $5 > month charge if I had such an option on AOLserver > Currently I use version 2.1 for NT of AOLserver > Thankyou to everyone Modern httpd's support http 1.1 header redirection, which is what you need. Not sure if that was happening in V2.1 yet, though. about 98% of the browsers out there support it as well. > > Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 10:33:15 -0700 > From: jim@rubylane.com > Subject: Re: IP numbers cost and IP masking > > Kerry - it sounds like a scam to me. ISP's do have to file a "network > plan" to justify their IP number usage, so some places will charge you > a setup fee and possible make you write the plan. But if it's $5/mo > per IP address, that sounds very high. Above Net charges us $30 one-time > to get additional IP addresses - as many as we can justify. My guess is that you're paying Above.Net a helluva lot more than Kerry is paying her ISP. I give free subnets based on need to colo and dedicated line customers, but $20/mo dialup customers have to pay $5/mo for a static IP. I also offer two different "grades" of virtual www hosting, one with a unique IP, and one without, for less money. James Smallacombe Internet Access for The Delaware james@pil.net Valley in PA, NJ and DE PlantageNet Internet Ltd. http://www.pil.net ======================================================================== ISPF 3 - The Forum for ISPs by ISPs(tm) || Nov 15-17, 1999, New Orleans 3 days of clues, news, and views from the industry's best and brightest. Visit for information and registration. ======================================================================== ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 10:11:20 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Greg Saliba Subject: Re: AOLSERVER Digest - 18 Aug 1999 to 19 Aug 1999 In-Reply-To: <199908200410.AAA02564@services.web.aol.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Ok there is no handle allocated and the database server is running. Basically it works fine until I change the date on the machine. Everything that had been working that relates to database stops. I even tried using the nsql function from the command line and that did not work either. Thanks again. > > Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 14:35:23 -0700 > From: Greg Saliba > Subject: Y2K issues > > I have a question for you people. I am running AOLserver 2.3 on a Sun > Solaris box with Illustra 3.2 as the database. I rolled the date on the > Sun to 2000 and everything seemed ok until I tried using the database > pools. That is when I got this error > > [19/Aug/2000:13:58:05 -0700][26331.25229][localsystem] Notice: 267 > bytes > of raw data to follow: > could not allocate 1 handle(s) from pool "pool_name" > while executing > "ns_db gethandle "pool_name"" > invoked from within > "set db [ns_db gethandle "pool_name"]..." > (procedure "running_procedure" line 3) > invoked from within > "running_procedure cns2641 {}" > > Does anyone know what this means? I was under the impression bot Illustra > and AOLserver where Y2k compliant. Any help in this matter would be > greatly appreciated. > > Thanks. > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 18:29:56 -0500 > From: "J. Michael Roberts" > Subject: Re: Y2K issues > > Well, I wouldn't automatically chalk that up to Y2K. In fact, I get that > plenty when I shoot myself in the foot *whap* I mean, try an > unconventional flow of control. If the particular HTTP transaction has > already allocated a db handle, you'll get that if it trys to allocate > another (prevents deadlock: you have to allocate all your handles at > once.) > > On Thu, 19 Aug 1999, Greg Saliba wrote: > > > I have a question for you people. I am running AOLserver 2.3 on a Sun > > Solaris box with Illustra 3.2 as the database. I rolled the date on the > > Sun to 2000 and everything seemed ok until I tried using the database > > pools. That is when I got this error > > > > [19/Aug/2000:13:58:05 -0700][26331.25229][localsystem] Notice: 267 > > bytes > > of raw data to follow: > > could not allocate 1 handle(s) from pool "pool_name" > > while executing > > "ns_db gethandle "pool_name"" > > invoked from within > > "set db [ns_db gethandle "pool_name"]..." > > (procedure "running_procedure" line 3) > > invoked from within > > "running_procedure cns2641 {}" > > > > Does anyone know what this means? I was under the impression bot Illustra > > and AOLserver where Y2k compliant. Any help in this matter would be > > greatly appreciated. > > > > Thanks. > > > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 18:56:07 -0700 > From: jim@rubylane.com > Subject: Re: Y2K issues > > Look in your server log where the web server first starts too. (BTW, is > the Illustra server running?) If the database initialization fails, you'll > get this error when you try to alloc a handle. > > > > > Well, I wouldn't automatically chalk that up to Y2K. In fact, I get that > > plenty when I shoot myself in the foot *whap* I mean, try an > > unconventional flow of control. If the particular HTTP transaction has > > already allocated a db handle, you'll get that if it trys to allocate > > another (prevents deadlock: you have to allocate all your handles at > > once.) > > > > On Thu, 19 Aug 1999, Greg Saliba wrote: > > > > > I have a question for you people. I am running AOLserver 2.3 on a Sun > > > Solaris box with Illustra 3.2 as the database. I rolled the date on the > > > Sun to 2000 and everything seemed ok until I tried using the database > > > pools. That is when I got this error > > > > > > [19/Aug/2000:13:58:05 -0700][26331.25229][localsystem] Notice: 267 > > > bytes > > > of raw data to follow: > > > could not allocate 1 handle(s) from pool "pool_name" > > > while executing > > > "ns_db gethandle "pool_name"" > > > invoked from within > > > "set db [ns_db gethandle "pool_name"]..." > > > (procedure "running_procedure" line 3) > > > invoked from within > > > "running_procedure cns2641 {}" > > > > > > Does anyone know what this means? I was under the impression bot Illustra > > > and AOLserver where Y2k compliant. Any help in this matter would be > > > greatly appreciated. > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 22:09:12 -0500 > From: "J. Michael Roberts" > Subject: Re: Y2K issues > > Ah, yeah, I forgot that case. I knew there was another... > > On Thu, 19 Aug 1999 jim@rubylane.com wrote: > > > Look in your server log where the web server first starts too. (BTW, is > > the Illustra server running?) If the database initialization fails, you'll > > get this error when you try to alloc a handle. > > > > > > > > Well, I wouldn't automatically chalk that up to Y2K. In fact, I get that > > > plenty when I shoot myself in the foot *whap* I mean, try an > > > unconventional flow of control. If the particular HTTP transaction has > > > already allocated a db handle, you'll get that if it trys to allocate > > > another (prevents deadlock: you have to allocate all your handles at > > > once.) > > > > > > On Thu, 19 Aug 1999, Greg Saliba wrote: > > > > > > > I have a question for you people. I am running AOLserver 2.3 on a Sun > > > > Solaris box with Illustra 3.2 as the database. I rolled the date on the > > > > Sun to 2000 and everything seemed ok until I tried using the database > > > > pools. That is when I got this error > > > > > > > > [19/Aug/2000:13:58:05 -0700][26331.25229][localsystem] Notice: 267 > > > > bytes > > > > of raw data to follow: > > > > could not allocate 1 handle(s) from pool "pool_name" > > > > while executing > > > > "ns_db gethandle "pool_name"" > > > > invoked from within > > > > "set db [ns_db gethandle "pool_name"]..." > > > > (procedure "running_procedure" line 3) > > > > invoked from within > > > > "running_procedure cns2641 {}" > > > > > > > > Does anyone know what this means? I was under the impression bot Illustra > > > > and AOLserver where Y2k compliant. Any help in this matter would be > > > > greatly appreciated. > > > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > End of AOLSERVER Digest - 18 Aug 1999 to 19 Aug 1999 > **************************************************** > ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 11:46:37 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: jim@rubylane.com Subject: Re: AOLSERVER Digest - 18 Aug 1999 to 19 Aug 1999 In-Reply-To: from "Greg Saliba" at Aug 20, 99 10:11:20 am Content-Type: text If nsql doesn't work, the problem is in Illustra, right? I think the version of Illustra AOL was distributing had an expiration date. You might try checking your Illustra license manager logs to see if you have a problem there. > > Ok there is no handle allocated and the database server is running. > Basically it works fine until I change the date on the machine. > Everything that had been working that relates to database stops. I even > tried using the nsql function from the command line and that did not work > either. > > Thanks again. > > > > > > Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 14:35:23 -0700 > > From: Greg Saliba > > Subject: Y2K issues > > > > I have a question for you people. I am running AOLserver 2.3 on a Sun > > Solaris box with Illustra 3.2 as the database. I rolled the date on the > > Sun to 2000 and everything seemed ok until I tried using the database > > pools. That is when I got this error > > > > [19/Aug/2000:13:58:05 -0700][26331.25229][localsystem] Notice: 267 > > bytes > > of raw data to follow: > > could not allocate 1 handle(s) from pool "pool_name" > > while executing > > "ns_db gethandle "pool_name"" > > invoked from within > > "set db [ns_db gethandle "pool_name"]..." > > (procedure "running_procedure" line 3) > > invoked from within > > "running_procedure cns2641 {}" > > > > Does anyone know what this means? I was under the impression bot Illustra > > and AOLserver where Y2k compliant. Any help in this matter would be > > greatly appreciated. > > > > Thanks. > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 18:29:56 -0500 > > From: "J. Michael Roberts" > > Subject: Re: Y2K issues > > > > Well, I wouldn't automatically chalk that up to Y2K. In fact, I get that > > plenty when I shoot myself in the foot *whap* I mean, try an > > unconventional flow of control. If the particular HTTP transaction has > > already allocated a db handle, you'll get that if it trys to allocate > > another (prevents deadlock: you have to allocate all your handles at > > once.) > > > > On Thu, 19 Aug 1999, Greg Saliba wrote: > > > > > I have a question for you people. I am running AOLserver 2.3 on a Sun > > > Solaris box with Illustra 3.2 as the database. I rolled the date on the > > > Sun to 2000 and everything seemed ok until I tried using the database > > > pools. That is when I got this error > > > > > > [19/Aug/2000:13:58:05 -0700][26331.25229][localsystem] Notice: 267 > > > bytes > > > of raw data to follow: > > > could not allocate 1 handle(s) from pool "pool_name" > > > while executing > > > "ns_db gethandle "pool_name"" > > > invoked from within > > > "set db [ns_db gethandle "pool_name"]..." > > > (procedure "running_procedure" line 3) > > > invoked from within > > > "running_procedure cns2641 {}" > > > > > > Does anyone know what this means? I was under the impression bot Illustra > > > and AOLserver where Y2k compliant. Any help in this matter would be > > > greatly appreciated. > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 18:56:07 -0700 > > From: jim@rubylane.com > > Subject: Re: Y2K issues > > > > Look in your server log where the web server first starts too. (BTW, is > > the Illustra server running?) If the database initialization fails, you'll > > get this error when you try to alloc a handle. > > > > > > > > Well, I wouldn't automatically chalk that up to Y2K. In fact, I get that > > > plenty when I shoot myself in the foot *whap* I mean, try an > > > unconventional flow of control. If the particular HTTP transaction has > > > already allocated a db handle, you'll get that if it trys to allocate > > > another (prevents deadlock: you have to allocate all your handles at > > > once.) > > > > > > On Thu, 19 Aug 1999, Greg Saliba wrote: > > > > > > > I have a question for you people. I am running AOLserver 2.3 on a Sun > > > > Solaris box with Illustra 3.2 as the database. I rolled the date on the > > > > Sun to 2000 and everything seemed ok until I tried using the database > > > > pools. That is when I got this error > > > > > > > > [19/Aug/2000:13:58:05 -0700][26331.25229][localsystem] Notice: 267 > > > > bytes > > > > of raw data to follow: > > > > could not allocate 1 handle(s) from pool "pool_name" > > > > while executing > > > > "ns_db gethandle "pool_name"" > > > > invoked from within > > > > "set db [ns_db gethandle "pool_name"]..." > > > > (procedure "running_procedure" line 3) > > > > invoked from within > > > > "running_procedure cns2641 {}" > > > > > > > > Does anyone know what this means? I was under the impression bot Illustra > > > > and AOLserver where Y2k compliant. Any help in this matter would be > > > > greatly appreciated. > > > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 22:09:12 -0500 > > From: "J. Michael Roberts" > > Subject: Re: Y2K issues > > > > Ah, yeah, I forgot that case. I knew there was another... > > > > On Thu, 19 Aug 1999 jim@rubylane.com wrote: > > > > > Look in your server log where the web server first starts too. (BTW, is > > > the Illustra server running?) If the database initialization fails, you'll > > > get this error when you try to alloc a handle. > > > > > > > > > > > Well, I wouldn't automatically chalk that up to Y2K. In fact, I get that > > > > plenty when I shoot myself in the foot *whap* I mean, try an > > > > unconventional flow of control. If the particular HTTP transaction has > > > > already allocated a db handle, you'll get that if it trys to allocate > > > > another (prevents deadlock: you have to allocate all your handles at > > > > once.) > > > > > > > > On Thu, 19 Aug 1999, Greg Saliba wrote: > > > > > > > > > I have a question for you people. I am running AOLserver 2.3 on a Sun > > > > > Solaris box with Illustra 3.2 as the database. I rolled the date on the > > > > > Sun to 2000 and everything seemed ok until I tried using the database > > > > > pools. That is when I got this error > > > > > > > > > > [19/Aug/2000:13:58:05 -0700][26331.25229][localsystem] Notice: 267 > > > > > bytes > > > > > of raw data to follow: > > > > > could not allocate 1 handle(s) from pool "pool_name" > > > > > while executing > > > > > "ns_db gethandle "pool_name"" > > > > > invoked from within > > > > > "set db [ns_db gethandle "pool_name"]..." > > > > > (procedure "running_procedure" line 3) > > > > > invoked from within > > > > > "running_procedure cns2641 {}" > > > > > > > > > > Does anyone know what this means? I was under the impression bot Illustra > > > > > and AOLserver where Y2k compliant. Any help in this matter would be > > > > > greatly appreciated. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > End of AOLSERVER Digest - 18 Aug 1999 to 19 Aug 1999 > > **************************************************** > > > ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 14:58:27 -0500 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: "J. Michael Roberts" Subject: Re: AOLSERVER Digest - 18 Aug 1999 to 19 Aug 1999 In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII What did the nsql command give you in the way of an error message? (This is bizarre. I can't change the date on my machine, but I know that some have and things worked OK, so I'd reeeeally like to know what the situation is within the next, oh, say, four months...) On Fri, 20 Aug 1999, Greg Saliba wrote: > Ok there is no handle allocated and the database server is running. > Basically it works fine until I change the date on the machine. > Everything that had been working that relates to database stops. I even > tried using the nsql function from the command line and that did not work > either. > > Thanks again. > > > > > > Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 14:35:23 -0700 > > From: Greg Saliba > > Subject: Y2K issues > > > > I have a question for you people. I am running AOLserver 2.3 on a Sun > > Solaris box with Illustra 3.2 as the database. I rolled the date on the > > Sun to 2000 and everything seemed ok until I tried using the database > > pools. That is when I got this error > > > > [19/Aug/2000:13:58:05 -0700][26331.25229][localsystem] Notice: 267 > > bytes > > of raw data to follow: > > could not allocate 1 handle(s) from pool "pool_name" > > while executing > > "ns_db gethandle "pool_name"" > > invoked from within > > "set db [ns_db gethandle "pool_name"]..." > > (procedure "running_procedure" line 3) > > invoked from within > > "running_procedure cns2641 {}" > > > > Does anyone know what this means? I was under the impression bot Illustra > > and AOLserver where Y2k compliant. Any help in this matter would be > > greatly appreciated. > > > > Thanks. > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 18:29:56 -0500 > > From: "J. Michael Roberts" > > Subject: Re: Y2K issues > > > > Well, I wouldn't automatically chalk that up to Y2K. In fact, I get that > > plenty when I shoot myself in the foot *whap* I mean, try an > > unconventional flow of control. If the particular HTTP transaction has > > already allocated a db handle, you'll get that if it trys to allocate > > another (prevents deadlock: you have to allocate all your handles at > > once.) > > > > On Thu, 19 Aug 1999, Greg Saliba wrote: > > > > > I have a question for you people. I am running AOLserver 2.3 on a Sun > > > Solaris box with Illustra 3.2 as the database. I rolled the date on the > > > Sun to 2000 and everything seemed ok until I tried using the database > > > pools. That is when I got this error > > > > > > [19/Aug/2000:13:58:05 -0700][26331.25229][localsystem] Notice: 267 > > > bytes > > > of raw data to follow: > > > could not allocate 1 handle(s) from pool "pool_name" > > > while executing > > > "ns_db gethandle "pool_name"" > > > invoked from within > > > "set db [ns_db gethandle "pool_name"]..." > > > (procedure "running_procedure" line 3) > > > invoked from within > > > "running_procedure cns2641 {}" > > > > > > Does anyone know what this means? I was under the impression bot Illustra > > > and AOLserver where Y2k compliant. Any help in this matter would be > > > greatly appreciated. > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 18:56:07 -0700 > > From: jim@rubylane.com > > Subject: Re: Y2K issues > > > > Look in your server log where the web server first starts too. (BTW, is > > the Illustra server running?) If the database initialization fails, you'll > > get this error when you try to alloc a handle. > > > > > > > > Well, I wouldn't automatically chalk that up to Y2K. In fact, I get that > > > plenty when I shoot myself in the foot *whap* I mean, try an > > > unconventional flow of control. If the particular HTTP transaction has > > > already allocated a db handle, you'll get that if it trys to allocate > > > another (prevents deadlock: you have to allocate all your handles at > > > once.) > > > > > > On Thu, 19 Aug 1999, Greg Saliba wrote: > > > > > > > I have a question for you people. I am running AOLserver 2.3 on a Sun > > > > Solaris box with Illustra 3.2 as the database. I rolled the date on the > > > > Sun to 2000 and everything seemed ok until I tried using the database > > > > pools. That is when I got this error > > > > > > > > [19/Aug/2000:13:58:05 -0700][26331.25229][localsystem] Notice: 267 > > > > bytes > > > > of raw data to follow: > > > > could not allocate 1 handle(s) from pool "pool_name" > > > > while executing > > > > "ns_db gethandle "pool_name"" > > > > invoked from within > > > > "set db [ns_db gethandle "pool_name"]..." > > > > (procedure "running_procedure" line 3) > > > > invoked from within > > > > "running_procedure cns2641 {}" > > > > > > > > Does anyone know what this means? I was under the impression bot Illustra > > > > and AOLserver where Y2k compliant. Any help in this matter would be > > > > greatly appreciated. > > > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 22:09:12 -0500 > > From: "J. Michael Roberts" > > Subject: Re: Y2K issues > > > > Ah, yeah, I forgot that case. I knew there was another... > > > > On Thu, 19 Aug 1999 jim@rubylane.com wrote: > > > > > Look in your server log where the web server first starts too. (BTW, is > > > the Illustra server running?) If the database initialization fails, you'll > > > get this error when you try to alloc a handle. > > > > > > > > > > > Well, I wouldn't automatically chalk that up to Y2K. In fact, I get that > > > > plenty when I shoot myself in the foot *whap* I mean, try an > > > > unconventional flow of control. If the particular HTTP transaction has > > > > already allocated a db handle, you'll get that if it trys to allocate > > > > another (prevents deadlock: you have to allocate all your handles at > > > > once.) > > > > > > > > On Thu, 19 Aug 1999, Greg Saliba wrote: > > > > > > > > > I have a question for you people. I am running AOLserver 2.3 on a Sun > > > > > Solaris box with Illustra 3.2 as the database. I rolled the date on the > > > > > Sun to 2000 and everything seemed ok until I tried using the database > > > > > pools. That is when I got this error > > > > > > > > > > [19/Aug/2000:13:58:05 -0700][26331.25229][localsystem] Notice: 267 > > > > > bytes > > > > > of raw data to follow: > > > > > could not allocate 1 handle(s) from pool "pool_name" > > > > > while executing > > > > > "ns_db gethandle "pool_name"" > > > > > invoked from within > > > > > "set db [ns_db gethandle "pool_name"]..." > > > > > (procedure "running_procedure" line 3) > > > > > invoked from within > > > > > "running_procedure cns2641 {}" > > > > > > > > > > Does anyone know what this means? I was under the impression bot Illustra > > > > > and AOLserver where Y2k compliant. Any help in this matter would be > > > > > greatly appreciated. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > End of AOLSERVER Digest - 18 Aug 1999 to 19 Aug 1999 > > **************************************************** > > > ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 15:00:52 -0500 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: "J. Michael Roberts" Subject: Re: AOLSERVER Digest - 18 Aug 1999 to 19 Aug 1999 In-Reply-To: <19990820184637.28222.qmail@london.rubylane.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Aaaahh, yeah, ELM would do that. But I thought the license should extend till 2003 or something? At any rate further than August 2000. On Fri, 20 Aug 1999 jim@rubylane.com wrote: > If nsql doesn't work, the problem is in Illustra, right? I think > the version of Illustra AOL was distributing had an expiration date. > You might try checking your Illustra license manager logs to see if > you have a problem there. > > > > > Ok there is no handle allocated and the database server is running. > > Basically it works fine until I change the date on the machine. > > Everything that had been working that relates to database stops. I even > > tried using the nsql function from the command line and that did not work > > either. > > > > Thanks again. > > > > > > > > > > Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 14:35:23 -0700 > > > From: Greg Saliba > > > Subject: Y2K issues > > > > > > I have a question for you people. I am running AOLserver 2.3 on a Sun > > > Solaris box with Illustra 3.2 as the database. I rolled the date on the > > > Sun to 2000 and everything seemed ok until I tried using the database > > > pools. That is when I got this error > > > > > > [19/Aug/2000:13:58:05 -0700][26331.25229][localsystem] Notice: 267 > > > bytes > > > of raw data to follow: > > > could not allocate 1 handle(s) from pool "pool_name" > > > while executing > > > "ns_db gethandle "pool_name"" > > > invoked from within > > > "set db [ns_db gethandle "pool_name"]..." > > > (procedure "running_procedure" line 3) > > > invoked from within > > > "running_procedure cns2641 {}" > > > > > > Does anyone know what this means? I was under the impression bot Illustra > > > and AOLserver where Y2k compliant. Any help in this matter would be > > > greatly appreciated. > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > > > Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 18:29:56 -0500 > > > From: "J. Michael Roberts" > > > Subject: Re: Y2K issues > > > > > > Well, I wouldn't automatically chalk that up to Y2K. In fact, I get that > > > plenty when I shoot myself in the foot *whap* I mean, try an > > > unconventional flow of control. If the particular HTTP transaction has > > > already allocated a db handle, you'll get that if it trys to allocate > > > another (prevents deadlock: you have to allocate all your handles at > > > once.) > > > > > > On Thu, 19 Aug 1999, Greg Saliba wrote: > > > > > > > I have a question for you people. I am running AOLserver 2.3 on a Sun > > > > Solaris box with Illustra 3.2 as the database. I rolled the date on the > > > > Sun to 2000 and everything seemed ok until I tried using the database > > > > pools. That is when I got this error > > > > > > > > [19/Aug/2000:13:58:05 -0700][26331.25229][localsystem] Notice: 267 > > > > bytes > > > > of raw data to follow: > > > > could not allocate 1 handle(s) from pool "pool_name" > > > > while executing > > > > "ns_db gethandle "pool_name"" > > > > invoked from within > > > > "set db [ns_db gethandle "pool_name"]..." > > > > (procedure "running_procedure" line 3) > > > > invoked from within > > > > "running_procedure cns2641 {}" > > > > > > > > Does anyone know what this means? I was under the impression bot Illustra > > > > and AOLserver where Y2k compliant. Any help in this matter would be > > > > greatly appreciated. > > > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > > > Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 18:56:07 -0700 > > > From: jim@rubylane.com > > > Subject: Re: Y2K issues > > > > > > Look in your server log where the web server first starts too. (BTW, is > > > the Illustra server running?) If the database initialization fails, you'll > > > get this error when you try to alloc a handle. > > > > > > > > > > > Well, I wouldn't automatically chalk that up to Y2K. In fact, I get that > > > > plenty when I shoot myself in the foot *whap* I mean, try an > > > > unconventional flow of control. If the particular HTTP transaction has > > > > already allocated a db handle, you'll get that if it trys to allocate > > > > another (prevents deadlock: you have to allocate all your handles at > > > > once.) > > > > > > > > On Thu, 19 Aug 1999, Greg Saliba wrote: > > > > > > > > > I have a question for you people. I am running AOLserver 2.3 on a Sun > > > > > Solaris box with Illustra 3.2 as the database. I rolled the date on the > > > > > Sun to 2000 and everything seemed ok until I tried using the database > > > > > pools. That is when I got this error > > > > > > > > > > [19/Aug/2000:13:58:05 -0700][26331.25229][localsystem] Notice: 267 > > > > > bytes > > > > > of raw data to follow: > > > > > could not allocate 1 handle(s) from pool "pool_name" > > > > > while executing > > > > > "ns_db gethandle "pool_name"" > > > > > invoked from within > > > > > "set db [ns_db gethandle "pool_name"]..." > > > > > (procedure "running_procedure" line 3) > > > > > invoked from within > > > > > "running_procedure cns2641 {}" > > > > > > > > > > Does anyone know what this means? I was under the impression bot Illustra > > > > > and AOLserver where Y2k compliant. Any help in this matter would be > > > > > greatly appreciated. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > > > Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 22:09:12 -0500 > > > From: "J. Michael Roberts" > > > Subject: Re: Y2K issues > > > > > > Ah, yeah, I forgot that case. I knew there was another... > > > > > > On Thu, 19 Aug 1999 jim@rubylane.com wrote: > > > > > > > Look in your server log where the web server first starts too. (BTW, is > > > > the Illustra server running?) If the database initialization fails, you'll > > > > get this error when you try to alloc a handle. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Well, I wouldn't automatically chalk that up to Y2K. In fact, I get that > > > > > plenty when I shoot myself in the foot *whap* I mean, try an > > > > > unconventional flow of control. If the particular HTTP transaction has > > > > > already allocated a db handle, you'll get that if it trys to allocate > > > > > another (prevents deadlock: you have to allocate all your handles at > > > > > once.) > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 19 Aug 1999, Greg Saliba wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > I have a question for you people. I am running AOLserver 2.3 on a Sun > > > > > > Solaris box with Illustra 3.2 as the database. I rolled the date on the > > > > > > Sun to 2000 and everything seemed ok until I tried using the database > > > > > > pools. That is when I got this error > > > > > > > > > > > > [19/Aug/2000:13:58:05 -0700][26331.25229][localsystem] Notice: 267 > > > > > > bytes > > > > > > of raw data to follow: > > > > > > could not allocate 1 handle(s) from pool "pool_name" > > > > > > while executing > > > > > > "ns_db gethandle "pool_name"" > > > > > > invoked from within > > > > > > "set db [ns_db gethandle "pool_name"]..." > > > > > > (procedure "running_procedure" line 3) > > > > > > invoked from within > > > > > > "running_procedure cns2641 {}" > > > > > > > > > > > > Does anyone know what this means? I was under the impression bot Illustra > > > > > > and AOLserver where Y2k compliant. Any help in this matter would be > > > > > > greatly appreciated. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > > > End of AOLSERVER Digest - 18 Aug 1999 to 19 Aug 1999 > > > **************************************************** > > > > > > ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 17:16:58 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: jim@rubylane.com Subject: Re: AOLSERVER Digest - 18 Aug 1999 to 19 Aug 1999 In-Reply-To: from "J. Michael Roberts" at Aug 20, 99 03:00:52 pm Content-Type: text Yeah, I thought the license was 2002-2003 too. Maybe elm has a y2k glitch. (the elm we're referring to is the elan license manager...) -J > > Aaaahh, yeah, ELM would do that. But I thought the license should extend > till 2003 or something? At any rate further than August 2000. > > On Fri, 20 Aug 1999 jim@rubylane.com wrote: > > > If nsql doesn't work, the problem is in Illustra, right? I think > > the version of Illustra AOL was distributing had an expiration date. > > You might try checking your Illustra license manager logs to see if > > you have a problem there. > > > > > > > > Ok there is no handle allocated and the database server is running. > > > Basically it works fine until I change the date on the machine. > > > Everything that had been working that relates to database stops. I even > > > tried using the nsql function from the command line and that did not work > > > either. > > > > > > Thanks again. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 14:35:23 -0700 > > > > From: Greg Saliba > > > > Subject: Y2K issues > > > > > > > > I have a question for you people. I am running AOLserver 2.3 on a Sun > > > > Solaris box with Illustra 3.2 as the database. I rolled the date on the > > > > Sun to 2000 and everything seemed ok until I tried using the database > > > > pools. That is when I got this error > > > > > > > > [19/Aug/2000:13:58:05 -0700][26331.25229][localsystem] Notice: 267 > > > > bytes > > > > of raw data to follow: > > > > could not allocate 1 handle(s) from pool "pool_name" > > > > while executing > > > > "ns_db gethandle "pool_name"" > > > > invoked from within > > > > "set db [ns_db gethandle "pool_name"]..." > > > > (procedure "running_procedure" line 3) > > > > invoked from within > > > > "running_procedure cns2641 {}" > > > > > > > > Does anyone know what this means? I was under the impression bot Illustra > > > > and AOLserver where Y2k compliant. Any help in this matter would be > > > > greatly appreciated. > > > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > > > > > Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 18:29:56 -0500 > > > > From: "J. Michael Roberts" > > > > Subject: Re: Y2K issues > > > > > > > > Well, I wouldn't automatically chalk that up to Y2K. In fact, I get that > > > > plenty when I shoot myself in the foot *whap* I mean, try an > > > > unconventional flow of control. If the particular HTTP transaction has > > > > already allocated a db handle, you'll get that if it trys to allocate > > > > another (prevents deadlock: you have to allocate all your handles at > > > > once.) > > > > > > > > On Thu, 19 Aug 1999, Greg Saliba wrote: > > > > > > > > > I have a question for you people. I am running AOLserver 2.3 on a Sun > > > > > Solaris box with Illustra 3.2 as the database. I rolled the date on the > > > > > Sun to 2000 and everything seemed ok until I tried using the database > > > > > pools. That is when I got this error > > > > > > > > > > [19/Aug/2000:13:58:05 -0700][26331.25229][localsystem] Notice: 267 > > > > > bytes > > > > > of raw data to follow: > > > > > could not allocate 1 handle(s) from pool "pool_name" > > > > > while executing > > > > > "ns_db gethandle "pool_name"" > > > > > invoked from within > > > > > "set db [ns_db gethandle "pool_name"]..." > > > > > (procedure "running_procedure" line 3) > > > > > invoked from within > > > > > "running_procedure cns2641 {}" > > > > > > > > > > Does anyone know what this means? I was under the impression bot Illustra > > > > > and AOLserver where Y2k compliant. Any help in this matter would be > > > > > greatly appreciated. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > > > > > Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 18:56:07 -0700 > > > > From: jim@rubylane.com > > > > Subject: Re: Y2K issues > > > > > > > > Look in your server log where the web server first starts too. (BTW, is > > > > the Illustra server running?) If the database initialization fails, you'll > > > > get this error when you try to alloc a handle. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Well, I wouldn't automatically chalk that up to Y2K. In fact, I get that > > > > > plenty when I shoot myself in the foot *whap* I mean, try an > > > > > unconventional flow of control. If the particular HTTP transaction has > > > > > already allocated a db handle, you'll get that if it trys to allocate > > > > > another (prevents deadlock: you have to allocate all your handles at > > > > > once.) > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 19 Aug 1999, Greg Saliba wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > I have a question for you people. I am running AOLserver 2.3 on a Sun > > > > > > Solaris box with Illustra 3.2 as the database. I rolled the date on the > > > > > > Sun to 2000 and everything seemed ok until I tried using the database > > > > > > pools. That is when I got this error > > > > > > > > > > > > [19/Aug/2000:13:58:05 -0700][26331.25229][localsystem] Notice: 267 > > > > > > bytes > > > > > > of raw data to follow: > > > > > > could not allocate 1 handle(s) from pool "pool_name" > > > > > > while executing > > > > > > "ns_db gethandle "pool_name"" > > > > > > invoked from within > > > > > > "set db [ns_db gethandle "pool_name"]..." > > > > > > (procedure "running_procedure" line 3) > > > > > > invoked from within > > > > > > "running_procedure cns2641 {}" > > > > > > > > > > > > Does anyone know what this means? I was under the impression bot Illustra > > > > > > and AOLserver where Y2k compliant. Any help in this matter would be > > > > > > greatly appreciated. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > > > > > Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 22:09:12 -0500 > > > > From: "J. Michael Roberts" > > > > Subject: Re: Y2K issues > > > > > > > > Ah, yeah, I forgot that case. I knew there was another... > > > > > > > > On Thu, 19 Aug 1999 jim@rubylane.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > Look in your server log where the web server first starts too. (BTW, is > > > > > the Illustra server running?) If the database initialization fails, you'll > > > > > get this error when you try to alloc a handle. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Well, I wouldn't automatically chalk that up to Y2K. In fact, I get that > > > > > > plenty when I shoot myself in the foot *whap* I mean, try an > > > > > > unconventional flow of control. If the particular HTTP transaction has > > > > > > already allocated a db handle, you'll get that if it trys to allocate > > > > > > another (prevents deadlock: you have to allocate all your handles at > > > > > > once.) > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 19 Aug 1999, Greg Saliba wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have a question for you people. I am running AOLserver 2.3 on a Sun > > > > > > > Solaris box with Illustra 3.2 as the database. I rolled the date on the > > > > > > > Sun to 2000 and everything seemed ok until I tried using the database > > > > > > > pools. That is when I got this error > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [19/Aug/2000:13:58:05 -0700][26331.25229][localsystem] Notice: 267 > > > > > > > bytes > > > > > > > of raw data to follow: > > > > > > > could not allocate 1 handle(s) from pool "pool_name" > > > > > > > while executing > > > > > > > "ns_db gethandle "pool_name"" > > > > > > > invoked from within > > > > > > > "set db [ns_db gethandle "pool_name"]..." > > > > > > > (procedure "running_procedure" line 3) > > > > > > > invoked from within > > > > > > > "running_procedure cns2641 {}" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Does anyone know what this means? I was under the impression bot Illustra > > > > > > > and AOLserver where Y2k compliant. Any help in this matter would be > > > > > > > greatly appreciated. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > > > > > End of AOLSERVER Digest - 18 Aug 1999 to 19 Aug 1999 > > > > **************************************************** > > > > > > > > > > ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 19:39:15 -0500 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: "J. Michael Roberts" Subject: Re: AOLSERVER Digest - 18 Aug 1999 to 19 Aug 1999 In-Reply-To: <19990821001658.19754.qmail@london.rubylane.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII That would surprise me (the y2k glitch idea) because I'm pretty sure that elm uses a Julian system rather than a Gregorian 2-digit date. No, I'd like to hear what error message nsql is returning; I hope that will shed some light on the matter. On Fri, 20 Aug 1999 jim@rubylane.com wrote: > Yeah, I thought the license was 2002-2003 too. Maybe elm has a y2k glitch. > (the elm we're referring to is the elan license manager...) -J > > > > > Aaaahh, yeah, ELM would do that. But I thought the license should extend > > till 2003 or something? At any rate further than August 2000. > > > > On Fri, 20 Aug 1999 jim@rubylane.com wrote: > > > > > If nsql doesn't work, the problem is in Illustra, right? I think > > > the version of Illustra AOL was distributing had an expiration date. > > > You might try checking your Illustra license manager logs to see if > > > you have a problem there. > > > > > > > > > > > Ok there is no handle allocated and the database server is running. > > > > Basically it works fine until I change the date on the machine. > > > > Everything that had been working that relates to database stops. I even > > > > tried using the nsql function from the command line and that did not work > > > > either. > > > > > > > > Thanks again. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 14:35:23 -0700 > > > > > From: Greg Saliba > > > > > Subject: Y2K issues > > > > > > > > > > I have a question for you people. I am running AOLserver 2.3 on a Sun > > > > > Solaris box with Illustra 3.2 as the database. I rolled the date on the > > > > > Sun to 2000 and everything seemed ok until I tried using the database > > > > > pools. That is when I got this error > > > > > > > > > > [19/Aug/2000:13:58:05 -0700][26331.25229][localsystem] Notice: 267 > > > > > bytes > > > > > of raw data to follow: > > > > > could not allocate 1 handle(s) from pool "pool_name" > > > > > while executing > > > > > "ns_db gethandle "pool_name"" > > > > > invoked from within > > > > > "set db [ns_db gethandle "pool_name"]..." > > > > > (procedure "running_procedure" line 3) > > > > > invoked from within > > > > > "running_procedure cns2641 {}" > > > > > > > > > > Does anyone know what this means? I was under the impression bot Illustra > > > > > and AOLserver where Y2k compliant. Any help in this matter would be > > > > > greatly appreciated. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > > Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 18:29:56 -0500 > > > > > From: "J. Michael Roberts" > > > > > Subject: Re: Y2K issues > > > > > > > > > > Well, I wouldn't automatically chalk that up to Y2K. In fact, I get that > > > > > plenty when I shoot myself in the foot *whap* I mean, try an > > > > > unconventional flow of control. If the particular HTTP transaction has > > > > > already allocated a db handle, you'll get that if it trys to allocate > > > > > another (prevents deadlock: you have to allocate all your handles at > > > > > once.) > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 19 Aug 1999, Greg Saliba wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > I have a question for you people. I am running AOLserver 2.3 on a Sun > > > > > > Solaris box with Illustra 3.2 as the database. I rolled the date on the > > > > > > Sun to 2000 and everything seemed ok until I tried using the database > > > > > > pools. That is when I got this error > > > > > > > > > > > > [19/Aug/2000:13:58:05 -0700][26331.25229][localsystem] Notice: 267 > > > > > > bytes > > > > > > of raw data to follow: > > > > > > could not allocate 1 handle(s) from pool "pool_name" > > > > > > while executing > > > > > > "ns_db gethandle "pool_name"" > > > > > > invoked from within > > > > > > "set db [ns_db gethandle "pool_name"]..." > > > > > > (procedure "running_procedure" line 3) > > > > > > invoked from within > > > > > > "running_procedure cns2641 {}" > > > > > > > > > > > > Does anyone know what this means? I was under the impression bot Illustra > > > > > > and AOLserver where Y2k compliant. Any help in this matter would be > > > > > > greatly appreciated. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > > Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 18:56:07 -0700 > > > > > From: jim@rubylane.com > > > > > Subject: Re: Y2K issues > > > > > > > > > > Look in your server log where the web server first starts too. (BTW, is > > > > > the Illustra server running?) If the database initialization fails, you'll > > > > > get this error when you try to alloc a handle. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Well, I wouldn't automatically chalk that up to Y2K. In fact, I get that > > > > > > plenty when I shoot myself in the foot *whap* I mean, try an > > > > > > unconventional flow of control. If the particular HTTP transaction has > > > > > > already allocated a db handle, you'll get that if it trys to allocate > > > > > > another (prevents deadlock: you have to allocate all your handles at > > > > > > once.) > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 19 Aug 1999, Greg Saliba wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have a question for you people. I am running AOLserver 2.3 on a Sun > > > > > > > Solaris box with Illustra 3.2 as the database. I rolled the date on the > > > > > > > Sun to 2000 and everything seemed ok until I tried using the database > > > > > > > pools. That is when I got this error > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [19/Aug/2000:13:58:05 -0700][26331.25229][localsystem] Notice: 267 > > > > > > > bytes > > > > > > > of raw data to follow: > > > > > > > could not allocate 1 handle(s) from pool "pool_name" > > > > > > > while executing > > > > > > > "ns_db gethandle "pool_name"" > > > > > > > invoked from within > > > > > > > "set db [ns_db gethandle "pool_name"]..." > > > > > > > (procedure "running_procedure" line 3) > > > > > > > invoked from within > > > > > > > "running_procedure cns2641 {}" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Does anyone know what this means? I was under the impression bot Illustra > > > > > > > and AOLserver where Y2k compliant. Any help in this matter would be > > > > > > > greatly appreciated. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > > Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 22:09:12 -0500 > > > > > From: "J. Michael Roberts" > > > > > Subject: Re: Y2K issues > > > > > > > > > > Ah, yeah, I forgot that case. I knew there was another... > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 19 Aug 1999 jim@rubylane.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Look in your server log where the web server first starts too. (BTW, is > > > > > > the Illustra server running?) If the database initialization fails, you'll > > > > > > get this error when you try to alloc a handle. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Well, I wouldn't automatically chalk that up to Y2K. In fact, I get that > > > > > > > plenty when I shoot myself in the foot *whap* I mean, try an > > > > > > > unconventional flow of control. If the particular HTTP transaction has > > > > > > > already allocated a db handle, you'll get that if it trys to allocate > > > > > > > another (prevents deadlock: you have to allocate all your handles at > > > > > > > once.) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 19 Aug 1999, Greg Saliba wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have a question for you people. I am running AOLserver 2.3 on a Sun > > > > > > > > Solaris box with Illustra 3.2 as the database. I rolled the date on the > > > > > > > > Sun to 2000 and everything seemed ok until I tried using the database > > > > > > > > pools. That is when I got this error > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [19/Aug/2000:13:58:05 -0700][26331.25229][localsystem] Notice: 267 > > > > > > > > bytes > > > > > > > > of raw data to follow: > > > > > > > > could not allocate 1 handle(s) from pool "pool_name" > > > > > > > > while executing > > > > > > > > "ns_db gethandle "pool_name"" > > > > > > > > invoked from within > > > > > > > > "set db [ns_db gethandle "pool_name"]..." > > > > > > > > (procedure "running_procedure" line 3) > > > > > > > > invoked from within > > > > > > > > "running_procedure cns2641 {}" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Does anyone know what this means? I was under the impression bot Illustra > > > > > > > > and AOLserver where Y2k compliant. Any help in this matter would be > > > > > > > > greatly appreciated. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > > End of AOLSERVER Digest - 18 Aug 1999 to 19 Aug 1999 > > > > > **************************************************** > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 21 Aug 1999 11:37:18 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Kerry Barlow Subject: IP masking continued Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Thankyou to everyone who responded to my last IP masking query. Members stated that the browsers for years have had the capability. However what about AOL server 2.1 itself? It appeared that it could be kludged into 2.1 NT if a person was knowledgable enough. I dont understand how the browser can find the correct IP address however? If I register a client with Internic as www.melons.com and I have assigned them an IP of x.x.x.789 and a 2nd client mntnweb.com assigned x.x.x.799 this makes sense, DNS tables do the converting and send them to my server and AOL decides which IP# and webpages to serve up. If they all are using the same IP number with differant DNS names, how do browsers know to find my server? If melons.com and mntnweb.com both use an ip of x.x.x.799 how does Joe using his browser in Turkey accesing his ISP's DNS server find the correct computer server(mine) to access,if I have 2 companies assigned the same IP# ? My previous question about IP # prices appears to have been answerd as,"it is whatever the ISP thereselves wishs to charge" Some ISP"s are generous and some want every nickle. Thankyou all very much. ( by the way I happen to be male) Sincerely Kerry Admin@MntnWeb.Com WWW server hosting Http://mntnweb.com Binghamton online Webcam Http://MntnWeb.Com/bing.htm CHRISTMAS Web Page Http://mntnweb.com/xmas.htm ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 22 Aug 1999 07:23:40 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: James Smallacombe Subject: IP MASKING Continued Re: AOLSERVER Digest - 20 Aug 1999 to 21 Au In-Reply-To: <199908220408.AAA18889@services.web.aol.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Sun, 22 Aug 1999, Automatic digest processor wrote: > Thankyou to everyone who responded to my last IP masking query. Members > stated that the browsers for years have had the capability. However what > about AOL server 2.1 itself? I believe it was later versions (2.3 and later?) that support it. > It appeared that it could be kludged into 2.1 NT if a person was > knowledgable enough. > I dont understand how the browser can find the correct IP address however? > If I register a client with Internic as www.melons.com and I have assigned > them an IP of > x.x.x.789 and a 2nd client mntnweb.com assigned x.x.x.799 this makes > sense, DNS tables do the converting and send them to my server and AOL > decides which IP# and webpages to serve up. > If they all are using the same IP number with differant DNS names, how do > browsers know to find my server? If melons.com and mntnweb.com both use an > ip of x.x.x.799 Because the ip address isn't what decides which virtual site comes up. It's header redirection, which is part of the http 1.1 spec, but has been supported by http 1.0 browsers for years (netscape 2.0 and later and IE 3.0 and later, I believe). > My previous question about IP # prices appears to have been answerd as,"it > is whatever the ISP thereselves wishs to charge" Some ISP"s are generous and > some want every nickle. Some people consider a unique IP address for each virtual www host a waste of address space these days. I can see situations where it would be important to have it, but mostly it's uneccessary. It you can't cough up $5/mo extra for it, it's doubtful that you need it. James Smallacombe Internet Access for The Delaware james@pil.net Valley in PA, NJ and DE PlantageNet Internet Ltd. http://www.pil.net ======================================================================== ISPF 3 - The Forum for ISPs by ISPs(tm) || Nov 15-17, 1999, New Orleans 3 days of clues, news, and views from the industry's best and brightest. Visit for information and registration. ======================================================================== ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 22 Aug 1999 11:37:19 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: colin roald Subject: ns_register_proc bug? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Thank-you to those who replied to my previous questions. (And incidentally, I eventually discovered that the HTTP status codes were also listed in the docs for ns_return.) I have been trying to figure out how redirection through ns_register_proc works, and I believe I've been bitten by a bug. I wanted to move all my quasi-static .adp pages to .html urls, so that search engines will look at them. (I could be wrong, but I think they're ignoring me now.) I wanted to install a redirect so that old links will still work. Here's my code: ns_register_proc GET /*.adp redirect_adp_html # ns_register_proc GET /*adp redirect_adp_html # <- this does not work. # ns_register_proc GET /roald/*adp redirect_adp_html # <- however, this does. proc redirect_adp_html { conn why } { set requested_url [ns_conn url] regsub {adp$} $requested_url {html} corrected_url ns_log Notice "redirecting request for $requested_url to $corrected_url" ns_returnredirect $corrected_url } For some reason, the '/*adp' pattern doesn't work, but '/*.adp' and '/roald/*adp' do. The docs make no mention of '.' being a special character. And yes, this time I *have* tried to 'use the source, Luke', but I can't figure out what it's doing. This is with AOLserver/3.0b3 and Linux 2.2.5-15/glibc 2.1 (RedHat 6.0). I still haven't got nsvhr to work, though. Is there anybody out there who can assure me that yes, it really does work? Thanks, -- colin | when i was young, i found out that the big toe always ends up making roald | a hole in the sock. so i stopped wearing socks. (albert einstein) ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 11:14:45 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: George Nachman Subject: Re: AOLSERVER Digest - 21 Aug 1999 to 22 Aug 1999 In-Reply-To: <199908230404.AAA25404@services.web.aol.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Mon, 23 Aug 1999, Automatic digest processor wrote: > > Thank-you to those who replied to my previous questions. (And incidentally, > I eventually discovered that the HTTP status codes were also listed in > the docs for ns_return.) > > I have been trying to figure out how redirection through ns_register_proc > works, and I believe I've been bitten by a bug. > > I wanted to move all my quasi-static .adp pages to .html urls, so that > search engines will look at them. (I could be wrong, but I think they're > ignoring me now.) I wanted to install a redirect so that old links will > still work. Here's my code: > > ns_register_proc GET /*.adp redirect_adp_html > # ns_register_proc GET /*adp redirect_adp_html # <- this does not work. > # ns_register_proc GET /roald/*adp redirect_adp_html # <- however, this does. > > proc redirect_adp_html { conn why } { > set requested_url [ns_conn url] > regsub {adp$} $requested_url {html} corrected_url > ns_log Notice "redirecting request for $requested_url to $corrected_url" > ns_returnredirect $corrected_url > } > > For some reason, the '/*adp' pattern doesn't work, but '/*.adp' and > '/roald/*adp' do. The docs make no mention of '.' being a special > character. And yes, this time I *have* tried to 'use the source, > Luke', but I can't figure out what it's doing. > > This is with AOLserver/3.0b3 and Linux 2.2.5-15/glibc 2.1 (RedHat 6.0). > > I still haven't got nsvhr to work, though. Is there anybody out there > who can assure me that yes, it really does work? > Read aolserver3/doc/urlspace.txt to understand the following paragraph: I think the cause of this problem is that AOLserver registers a request on "/*.adp" long before your code is run, creating a channel with a filter of "*.adp". When you register "/*adp" that creates a new channel. When a request comes in matching "*.adp", the first channel is compared and used, and your request is never gotten to. Now, if you register "/*.adp", that overwrites the old request registered in nsd/adp.c. The reason that /roald/*adp works is that AOLserver chooses the "deepest" match in the trie. Since /roald/*adp has a slash in it, it is more specific that /*.adp and is used instead. As for your nsvhr problem, have you tried the sample nsd.tcl that can be found in aolserver3/nsvhr/nsd.tcl? --George ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 08:44:58 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: colin roald Subject: Re: AOLSERVER Digest - 21 Aug 1999 to 22 Aug 1999 In-Reply-To: ; from George Nachman on Mon, Aug 23, 1999 at 11:14:45AM -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Quoth George Nachman : > I think the cause of this problem is that AOLserver registers a request on > "/*.adp" long before your code is run, creating a channel with a filter of > "*.adp". When you register "/*adp" that creates a new channel. When a > request comes in matching "*.adp", the first channel is compared and used, > and your request is never gotten to. Aha. Thanks. That had me good and confused for a while. Memo to self: always include the dot. > As for your nsvhr problem, have you tried the sample nsd.tcl that can be > found in aolserver3/nsvhr/nsd.tcl? No -- thanks for pointing that out. -- colin | when i was young, i found out that the big toe always ends up making roald | a hole in the sock. so i stopped wearing socks. (albert einstein) ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 09:26:21 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Greg Saliba Subject: Y2K Illustra Issus In-Reply-To: <199908210404.AAA11905@services.web.aol.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Here is the error message that nsql gives me when I try the command line XVL032:license manager: SERVER FEATURE MI_LIB_USAGE: Can't login to server can't login to database on server default, host sun_machine Not currently connected to a database as soon as I change the date back....it connect to that database right up no problems. Thanks for all your help. > > What did the nsql command give you in the way of an error message? > > (This is bizarre. I can't change the date on my machine, but I know that > some have and things worked OK, so I'd reeeeally like to know what the > situation is within the next, oh, say, four months...) > > > That would surprise me (the y2k glitch idea) because I'm pretty sure that > elm uses a Julian system rather than a Gregorian 2-digit date. No, I'd > like to hear what error message nsql is returning; I hope that will shed > some light on the matter. > > On Fri, 20 Aug 1999 jim@rubylane.com wrote: > > > Yeah, I thought the license was 2002-2003 too. Maybe elm has a y2k glitch. > > (the elm we're referring to is the elan license manager...) -J > > ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 19:04:19 +0100 Reply-To: alo@ms.com Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Andreas Lohr Organization: Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Co. Subject: Integrating a 3rd party Tcl extension MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Is it possible to integrate a Tcl extension which was linked against the Tcl 8.0 libraries into AOLserver? All I have got is the shared object; no sources. Could I get the Tcl 8.2 interpreter to look like the 8.0 version? Andreas ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 21:41:54 -0500 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: "J. Michael Roberts" Subject: Re: Y2K Illustra Issus In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Well, that sure is due to the ELM license manager (even says so right there.) That's quite odd. In the illustra/adm directory, you'll find some license keys, and you'll also see a license.log -- that's ELM's log. Search for the phrase "Loaded key" -- ELM does that when Illustra starts up, so it's not likely to be in there a whole lot. What is the date that that line reports? Mine is a date in 2006. Michael On Mon, 23 Aug 1999, Greg Saliba wrote: > Here is the error message that nsql gives me when I try the command line > > XVL032:license manager: SERVER FEATURE > MI_LIB_USAGE: Can't login to server > can't login to database on server default, host sun_machine > Not currently connected to a database > > as soon as I change the date back....it connect to that database right up > no problems. Thanks for all your help. > > > > > > What did the nsql command give you in the way of an error message? > > > > (This is bizarre. I can't change the date on my machine, but I know that > > some have and things worked OK, so I'd reeeeally like to know what the > > situation is within the next, oh, say, four months...) > > > > > > That would surprise me (the y2k glitch idea) because I'm pretty sure that > > elm uses a Julian system rather than a Gregorian 2-digit date. No, I'd > > like to hear what error message nsql is returning; I hope that will shed > > some light on the matter. > > > > On Fri, 20 Aug 1999 jim@rubylane.com wrote: > > > > > Yeah, I thought the license was 2002-2003 too. Maybe elm has a y2k glitch. > > > (the elm we're referring to is the elan license manager...) -J > > > > ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1999 10:53:57 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: "Kriston J. Rehberg" Subject: Re: Y2K issues MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Informix says that Illustra 3.2 and earlier are not Y2k-compliant. You are safe if you use Illustra Server 3.3x, but if you're using AOLserver, you probably are still using 3.2. ***The AOLserver license for Illustra only covers Illustra 3.2, NOT 3.3X!!***. If you want to use Illustra past 2000 you'll need to purchase Illustra 3.3 from Informix. The product is called "Illustra Server" and while it is still supported, it appears to be a discontinued product as far as Informix is concerned. For this kind of money, it's time for you to upgrade to Oracle or Sybase. http://www.informix.com/informix/products/year2000.htm By the way, database servers (midaemon) and their license managers (elmd) really don't like it when admins artificially spank the date forward and backward. Just a thought. Kris -- Kriston J. Rehberg America Online, Inc. http://kriston.net/ ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 12:27:25 -0700 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Greg Saliba Subject: Streaming Video In-Reply-To: <199908240408.AAA04679@services.web.aol.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Does anyone know of any reason that a mov file would not stream on AOLserver. I put it up on AOLserver and no streaming, I throw it on IIS and it streams. Is there a MIME type I have to adjust or anything like that? Thanks. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 17:22:55 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Justin Alcorn Organization: OhioOnline, Inc. Subject: Java Servlets /2.3.3/ jsdk 2.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The documentation on getting nsservlet working is for the jsdk 1.x (when it used .class files). Has anyone got a cookbook to get server.jar and servlet.jar, from the JSDK 2.1, working with AOLserver? -- Justin Alcorn, Director of Network Applications OhioOnline, Inc., Cleveland, OH ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 09:33:42 +0200 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Claudio Sacco Subject: Re: AOLSERVER Digest - 23 Aug 1999 to 25 Aug 1999 In-Reply-To: <19990826034836238.AAA282.210@SEGATE.SUNET.SE> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed undelete unsubscribe At 00.05 26/08/99 -0400, you wrote: >There are 2 messages totalling 78 lines in this issue. > >Topics of the day: > > 1. Y2K Illustra Issus > 2. Y2K issues > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >Date: Mon, 23 Aug 1999 21:41:54 -0500 >From: "J. Michael Roberts" >Subject: Re: Y2K Illustra Issus > >Well, that sure is due to the ELM license manager (even says so right >there.) That's quite odd. > >In the illustra/adm directory, you'll find some license keys, and you'll >also see a license.log -- that's ELM's log. Search for the phrase "Loaded >key" -- ELM does that when Illustra starts up, so it's not likely to be in >there a whole lot. What is the date that that line reports? Mine is a >date in 2006. > >Michael > >On Mon, 23 Aug 1999, Greg Saliba wrote: > > > Here is the error message that nsql gives me when I try the command line > > > > XVL032:license manager: SERVER FEATURE > > MI_LIB_USAGE: Can't login to server > > can't login to database on server default, host sun_machine > > Not currently connected to a database > > > > as soon as I change the date back....it connect to that database right up > > no problems. Thanks for all your help. > > > > > > > > > > What did the nsql command give you in the way of an error message? > > > > > > (This is bizarre. I can't change the date on my machine, but I know that > > > some have and things worked OK, so I'd reeeeally like to know what the > > > situation is within the next, oh, say, four months...) > > > > > > > > > That would surprise me (the y2k glitch idea) because I'm pretty sure that > > > elm uses a Julian system rather than a Gregorian 2-digit date. No, I'd > > > like to hear what error message nsql is returning; I hope that will shed > > > some light on the matter. > > > > > > On Fri, 20 Aug 1999 jim@rubylane.com wrote: > > > > > > > Yeah, I thought the license was 2002-2003 too. Maybe elm has a y2k > glitch. > > > > (the elm we're referring to is the elan license manager...) -J > > > > > > > >------------------------------ > >Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1999 10:53:57 -0400 >From: "Kriston J. Rehberg" >Subject: Re: Y2K issues > >Informix says that Illustra 3.2 and earlier are not Y2k-compliant. >You are safe if you use Illustra Server 3.3x, but if you're using >AOLserver, you probably are still using 3.2. ***The AOLserver license >for Illustra only covers Illustra 3.2, NOT 3.3X!!***. If you want to >use Illustra past 2000 you'll need to purchase Illustra 3.3 from >Informix. The product is called "Illustra Server" and while it is >still supported, it appears to be a discontinued product as far as >Informix is concerned. For this kind of money, it's time for you to >upgrade to Oracle or Sybase. > >http://www.informix.com/informix/products/year2000.htm > >By the way, database servers (midaemon) and their license managers >(elmd) really don't like it when admins artificially spank the date >forward and backward. Just a thought. > >Kris > >-- >Kriston J. Rehberg >America Online, Inc. http://kriston.net/ > >------------------------------ > >End of AOLSERVER Digest - 23 Aug 1999 to 25 Aug 1999 >**************************************************** Claudio Sacco Direttore Gruppo NETCOM n.verde 167-752627 http://www.internetpiu.com http://www.europe-net.com ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 16:13:28 EDT Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Lance Martel Subject: Calling Stored Procedures from TCL MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi all, I am trying to call a Sybase stored proc. from a TCL module on AOL Server. I can successfully run other SQL statements but the stored procedure will not return data. I see AOL Server's C API has specific functions to execute Sybase stored procs but the TCL API doesn't seem to have them. Does anyone have sample TCL code that calls stored procedures? Or, if TCL can't accomplish this, does anyone have C examples of the same thing? Thanks in advance. Lance Martel ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 18:29:35 -0400 Reply-To: Web Development with AOLserver Sender: Web Development with AOLserver From: Jonah Benton Subject: Evaluating AOLServer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Hello all, I'm evaluating AOLServer for a site that sees several million page views per day, many of them requiring database hits and dynamic presentation of results. Though I'm new to AOLServer, in the time I've spent with it I've been impressed with its openness and flexibility. However, I've been looking around for third-party information about configuration, performance and scalability, and so far the only resources I've found have been at http://www.photo.net and http://www.arsdigita,com. Some of that information is application, some of it isn't, or isn't fleshed out. I have a number of questions that I'd like to get answers to before going forward; if anyone can help with specific information or with links to specific information, that would be greatly appreciated. Here they are: * Other resources. Other than photo.net and arsdigita, are there other third party sites with information about running AOLServer? * Logging. I need to get both referrer and cookies into the logs so that my log analysis tools can reconstruct user sessions. I've been able to get referrer, but haven't seen a documented way to do cookies. Is this possible? * Configuration. I'd be running AOLServer on several front-end machines, going against a single Oracle 8 database. All Solaris 2.6 and 7 on Sparc. Is there anything I should be aware of regarding those configurations in a production setting? Is anyone running those configurations in production? * CGI connectivity. I need to run a legacy CGI and have heard reports that AOLServer's CGI support isn't its strong suit. Is anyone using its CGI support and having problems with it, or is anyone using CGI support and have good things to say about it? * Version. After reviewing features and documentation, I'm leaning towards using 3.0, even though it's a beta. Other than the features that have been removed, is there anything that worked in 2.3.x that doesn't work in 3.0 that I should be aware of? Anyone move to 3.0 and been unhappy with it? * Scalability. I'd like to figure out many machines I would need to service a given level of load, and what the peak load level a given machine can handle is- before running up against those limits in production. Configuration and implementation differences mean that benchmarks and user experiences in one environment won't have exact applicability to other environments, and for those and other reasons, I'm anticipating running tests to learn more about scalability for myself. Is there a best way to do this? Should I configure a box, create some pages that have representative transactions, and run ab or photo.net's tj utilities? Anyone have a load testing system or methodology that they like? Any advice is greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance, Jonah