From mpriesch at ican.at  Thu Nov  2 03:23:35 2000
From: mpriesch at ican.at (Marcus Priesch)
Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2000 09:23:35 +0100
Subject: [mod_backhand-users] Backhand to different servers on the same 
 machine (httpd_doc & httpd_perl)
References: <20001031172058.A21179@hbesoftware.com>
Message-ID: <3A012487.15E7F6CD@ican.at>

"Philippe M. Chiasson" wrote:
> 
> I am trying to setup something that sounds straightforward to me.  I have a server-farm with
> webservers running httpd_doc on port 80 and httpd_perl on port 8080. Right now the doc server proxies
> some requests to localhost:8080.  I want to use backhand for this instead.  So I installed it and configured it
> on both servers, running on different ports.  But somehow they seem to think they are the same server.
> 
> On looking on the backhand-status page, reloading it will always show one machine, sometime the one on port 80,
> sometimes the one on port 8080.  Is it possible that backhand uses IP only to differentiate the servers, not the
> combination IP+Port ???
> 
> I am confused here, everything seems to work fine, except that particular thing...
> 
> Also, I read some information on the mailing-list archives on how to replace mod_proxy by mod_backhand for a setup like
> mine, finding references to BackhandSelfRedirect, but I am absolutely not sure.  How can I make my document server backhand
> all *.pl requests to a backhand group of perl_servers ???

you can use mod_rewrite to rewrite all your *.pl requests to the backhand server running on port 8080

RewriteEngine On 
RewriteRule .*\.pl$ http://yourserver:8080/$0 [P,L]

and on port 8080 you configure a perl server with backhand capabilities to backhand
the requests to other perl/backhand servers -> mainly on other hardware, otherwise
it doesn't make much sense to backhand the request - you wont save any load :)

note: if you want to have two backhand server farms talk on the same net you have to use other
broadcast ports (if you plan to backhand your doc requests to another server farm)

hope that helps,
marcus.

-- 
________________________________________________________________________
ICAN Internet Services GmbH - www.ican.at                 Marcus Priesch
Loquaiplatz 12/1, A-1060 Vienna                         mpriesch at ican.at
Tel: +43(1) 595 41 24/26 Fax: +43(1) 595 41 24/99          ICQ: 56430787



From madmax at express.ru  Fri Nov  3 10:06:45 2000
From: madmax at express.ru (Maxim Kozin)
Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2000 18:06:45 +0300 (MSK)
Subject: [mod_backhand-users] socket:: No buffer space available
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.05.10010251728020.24511-100000@ds.express.ru>

	Hi all.

I use mod_backhand for testing purpose. 
apache 1.3.14, mod-rewrite 1.10, FreeBSD 4.1.x

Primary server accpet connection, mod_backhand work for <Dicrectory
/images/*> 
As loading on the primary server always BIG, mod_backhand always redirect
request (over internal proxy) to secondary "image server".
 I undestand, that may be mod_rewrite  can serve much better this 
configurations, but I want to test mod_backhand under heavy load.
 First (primary) server work well all time, but secondary "image  server"
after some time (approximately several hours) begin write to apache
error.log diagnostic:
 connect:: No such file or directory

This string occured from 100 to 1000(0?) time, and after this in error.log
appears string :
 socket:: No buffer space available

And after 1-10 hour error.log  looks so:

socket:: No buffer space available
connect:: No such file or directory
socket:: No buffer space available
socket:: No buffer space available
connect:: No such file or directory
socket:: No buffer space available

And death final  !

All network services blocked, but if You login over console, error.log
has only:
socket:: No buffer space available
socket:: No buffer space available
socket:: No buffer space available
socket:: No buffer space available
socket:: No buffer space available


Some kind of socket leak, imho.

Comment , pls.


b.r.
 Kozin Maxim





From theos at cnds.jhu.edu  Mon Nov  6 17:10:57 2000
From: theos at cnds.jhu.edu (Theo E. Schlossnagle)
Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2000 17:10:57 -0500
Subject: [mod_backhand-users] socket:: No buffer space available
References: <Pine.BSF.4.05.10010251728020.24511-100000@ds.express.ru>
Message-ID: <3A072C71.AFD7B1E2@cnds.jhu.edu>

I tried to replicate the problem, but I've only got one FreeBSD machine :-(. 
So, no luck.  I can see this happenning however.  I am pretty sure thatt here
is not a file descriptor leak.  I am pretty darn aggressive about closing file
descriptors.

The no buffer space available sounds like you are running our of mbufs.  Since
I am not a BSD guru, I don't really know how to fix this, but I am absolutely
sure that there is a way (probably with sysctl).

After running our of mbufs, the connects are probably failing because the
processes (Child <-> backhand parent) cannot talk over their UNIX domain
sockets that live in the UnixSocketDir.  This my guess as to what is going on.

The following could be blatant display of my ignorance of BSD, but you might
want to look at:

kern.maxfiles: 1064
kern.ipc.maxsockbuf: 262144
kern.ipc.nmbclusters: 1024
kern.ipc.mbuf_wait: 32
kern.ipc.nmbufs: 4096
kern.ipc.maxsockets: 1064

Those are the sysctl values I would imagine are pertinent on my system and I
would assume they are *WAY* to low!  For perspectiv eon the amount of resource
usage mod_backhand will use, the following holds:
  In addition to all of the fd's Apache will use normally, mod_backhand will
use up to 1000+(2 * # of children) more file descriptors.  These are used for
the interprocess communication and the session pooling.


Maxim Kozin wrote:
> I use mod_backhand for testing purpose.
> apache 1.3.14, mod-rewrite 1.10, FreeBSD 4.1.x
>
> connect:: No such file or directory
> socket:: No buffer space available
> And death final  !
>
> Some kind of socket leak, imho.

--
Theo Schlossnagle
1024D/A8EBCF8F/13BD 8C08 6BE2 629A 527E  2DC2 72C2 AD05 A8EB CF8F
2047R/33131B65/71 F7 95 64 49 76 5D BA  3D 90 B9 9F BE 27 24 E7



From neteler at geog.uni-hannover.de  Wed Nov  8 11:31:35 2000
From: neteler at geog.uni-hannover.de (Markus Neteler)
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2000 16:31:35 +0000
Subject: [mod_backhand-users] Obscure mail traffic with backhand?
In-Reply-To: <E13tXND-00077R-00@longsword.omniti.com>; from backhand-users-request@lists.backhand.org on Wed, Nov 08, 2000 at 10:42:51AM -0500
References: <E13tXND-00077R-00@longsword.omniti.com>
Message-ID: <20001108163135.B7970@hgeo02.geog.uni-hannover.de>

Hi all,

after installing backhand 1.1.0 and latest Apache successfully
on Linux and SUN/Solaris (they see each other), I found
obscure and intensive network traffic by using ethereal.

Continuously the server
a195-206-69-39.deploy.akamaitechnologies.com
was contacted:

a195-206-69-39.deploy.akamaitechnologies.com rapido-ip -> http [ACK] seq=... acq=...

As I am rather unfamiliar with the details of backhand, this might
be o.k. But it is not documented anywhere.

Perhaps someone is willing to explain this,

thanks in advance

 Markus

-- 
Dipl.-Geogr. Markus Neteler *  University of Hannover
Institute of Physical Geography and Landscape Ecology
Schneiderberg 50 * D-30167 Hannover * Germany
Tel: ++49-(0)511-762-4494  Fax: -3984



From theos at cnds.jhu.edu  Wed Nov  8 15:44:12 2000
From: theos at cnds.jhu.edu (Theo E. Schlossnagle)
Date: Wed, 08 Nov 2000 15:44:12 -0500
Subject: [mod_backhand-users] Obscure mail traffic with backhand?
References: <E13tXND-00077R-00@longsword.omniti.com> <20001108163135.B7970@hgeo02.geog.uni-hannover.de>
Message-ID: <3A09BB1C.8CCB12AC@cnds.jhu.edu>

Hmm... This isn't in the design of mod_backhand.  mod_backhand doesn't require
any connectivity tothe outside world..  Are you sure that this traffic was not
there before you got mod_backhand running?

The only thing I can think of that would cause this inside of mod_backhand is
the MulticastStats line.  If you MulticastStats and use *two* arguements, the
first is considered to be the IP address of the local server (in case it can't
figure that out for itself).

So, if you server has two IP address 10.0.0.101 and 192.168.10.101 and it
*thinks* it is 10.0.0.101, but you want it to be using the other
192.168.10.101 interface for backhand redirecting, then you could specify:
MulticastStats 192.168.10.101 192.168.10.255:4445

Then, all of the fellow machines will see this machines as 192.168.10.101
instead of 10.0.0.101.

So, if you had a MulticastStats line where the first arguement was the IP
address of that Akamai server, then the machine would be advcertising itself
as the akamai server.  When other machines within the cluster want to redirect
to it will redirect to the akamai server instead.

What do the IP addresses look like in the /backhand/ status page?

Markus Neteler wrote:
> after installing backhand 1.1.0 and latest Apache successfully
> on Linux and SUN/Solaris (they see each other), I found
> obscure and intensive network traffic by using ethereal.
> 
> Continuously the server
> a195-206-69-39.deploy.akamaitechnologies.com
> was contacted:
> 
> a195-206-69-39.deploy.akamaitechnologies.com rapido-ip -> http [ACK] seq=... acq=...
> 
> As I am rather unfamiliar with the details of backhand, this might
> be o.k. But it is not documented anywhere.
> 
> Perhaps someone is willing to explain this,

--
Theo Schlossnagle
1024D/A8EBCF8F/13BD 8C08 6BE2 629A 527E  2DC2 72C2 AD05 A8EB CF8F
2047R/33131B65/71 F7 95 64 49 76 5D BA  3D 90 B9 9F BE 27 24 E7



From neteler at geog.uni-hannover.de  Thu Nov  9 06:09:57 2000
From: neteler at geog.uni-hannover.de (Markus Neteler)
Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2000 11:09:57 +0000
Subject: [mod_backhand-users] Obscure mail traffic with backhand?
In-Reply-To: <3A09BB1C.8CCB12AC@cnds.jhu.edu>; from theos@cnds.jhu.edu on Wed, Nov 08, 2000 at 03:44:12PM -0500
References: <E13tXND-00077R-00@longsword.omniti.com> <20001108163135.B7970@hgeo02.geog.uni-hannover.de> <3A09BB1C.8CCB12AC@cnds.jhu.edu>
Message-ID: <20001109110957.A14390@hgeo02.geog.uni-hannover.de>

Theo,

thanks for your quick response!

On Wed, Nov 08, 2000 at 03:44:12PM -0500, Theo E. Schlossnagle wrote:
> Hmm... This isn't in the design of mod_backhand.  mod_backhand doesn't require
> any connectivity tothe outside world..  Are you sure that this traffic was not
> there before you got mod_backhand running?
unfortunately I tested after installing backhand. But it's good to know
that this is not the intention of backhand :-) Actually the traffic
is gone.

> So, if you had a MulticastStats line where the first arguement was the IP
> address of that Akamai server, then the machine would be advcertising itself
> as the akamai server.  When other machines within the cluster want to redirect
> to it will redirect to the akamai server instead.
No, it was a different address. But...

> What do the IP addresses look like in the /backhand/ status page?
..to be honest: I don't fully understand the concept of MulticastStats.
The address to specify, is it one of my servers? Sorry, but I didn't get
it from the docs/FAQ.

The situation:
I have my main server:
 130.75.72.14
(SUN)

My backup-server is
 130.75.72.36
(Linux, identical copy)

On  130.75.72.14 I have defined in httpd.conf:
[...]

 UnixSocketDir /usr/local/apache/backhand
 MulticastStats 130.75.72.36:4445,1
 AcceptStats    130.75.72.0/80

On  130.75.72.36 I have defined in httpd.conf:
[...]
  UnixSocketDir /var/backhand/backhand
  MulticastStats 130.75.72.14:4445,1
  AcceptStats 130.75.72.0/80

Looking at /backhand/:
http://bermuda.geog.uni-hannover.de/backhand/
0 bermuda.geog.uni-hannover.de 973765382 130.75.72.36:80 200900608  49161408 0/0 0 [0] 501697 1 0.000000/1 0.000000
(color red)

the www (aka hgeo02) is not seen...

Same comparing situation on www.geog.uni-hannover.de

http://www.geog.uni-hannover.de/cgi-bin/backhand-test
-> o.k.

http://bermuda.geog.uni-hannover.de/cgi-bin/backhand-test
-> o.k.

Servers are o.k., too.

Using
 MulticastStats 225.220.221.20:4445,1
on both servers backhand is running. But I am afraid that I am not allowed
to use this address... Or is it reserved for such activities?
nslookup tells me: 225.220.221.20: Non-existent host/domain. Or do I
have to calculate a proper address due to my network?

I would be glad if you could tell me about the MulticastStats secret
(and maybe put an live example onto the FAQ).

Thanks in advance

 Markus Neteler

PS: Final question: If backhand is running (as it did with the
225.220.221.20 address), how can I test the environment? Run some
CPU-intensive application on the main server? Or generate many web
accesses (how to do that?)? Just curious...

-- 
Dipl.-Geogr. Markus Neteler *  University of Hannover
Institute of Physical Geography and Landscape Ecology
Schneiderberg 50 * D-30167 Hannover * Germany
Tel: ++49-(0)511-762-4494  Fax: -3984



From neteler at geog.uni-hannover.de  Thu Nov  9 06:21:51 2000
From: neteler at geog.uni-hannover.de (Markus Neteler)
Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2000 11:21:51 +0000
Subject: [mod_backhand-users] Obscure mail traffic with backhand?
In-Reply-To: <20001109110957.A14390@hgeo02.geog.uni-hannover.de>; from neteler@geog.uni-hannover.de on Thu, Nov 09, 2000 at 11:09:57AM +0000
References: <E13tXND-00077R-00@longsword.omniti.com> <20001108163135.B7970@hgeo02.geog.uni-hannover.de> <3A09BB1C.8CCB12AC@cnds.jhu.edu> <20001109110957.A14390@hgeo02.geog.uni-hannover.de>
Message-ID: <20001109112151.A14636@hgeo02.geog.uni-hannover.de>

Hi again,

when configuratin both servers to
MulticastStats 225.220.221.20:4445,1

the backhand is running. But am I allowed to use
this address?

"ethereal" is telling me:
bermuda.geog.uni-hannover.de  225.220.221.20 UDP Source port: upnotify  Destination port: upnotify
www.geog.uni-hannover.de      225.220.221.20 UDP Source port: upnotify  Destination port: upnotify

Is that o.k?

Thank again

 Markus

-- 
Dipl.-Geogr. Markus Neteler *  University of Hannover
Institute of Physical Geography and Landscape Ecology
Schneiderberg 50 * D-30167 Hannover * Germany
Tel: ++49-(0)511-762-4494  Fax: -3984



From theos at cnds.jhu.edu  Thu Nov  9 13:12:53 2000
From: theos at cnds.jhu.edu (Theo E. Schlossnagle)
Date: Thu, 09 Nov 2000 13:12:53 -0500
Subject: [mod_backhand-users] Obscure mail traffic with backhand?
References: <E13tXND-00077R-00@longsword.omniti.com> <20001108163135.B7970@hgeo02.geog.uni-hannover.de> <3A09BB1C.8CCB12AC@cnds.jhu.edu> <20001109110957.A14390@hgeo02.geog.uni-hannover.de>
Message-ID: <3A0AE925.8EA45969@cnds.jhu.edu>

Markus Neteler wrote:
> The situation:
> I have my main server:
>  130.75.72.14
> (SUN)
> 
> My backup-server is
>  130.75.72.36
> (Linux, identical copy)
> 
> On  130.75.72.14 I have defined in httpd.conf:
> [...]
> 
>  UnixSocketDir /usr/local/apache/backhand
>  MulticastStats 130.75.72.36:4445,1
>  AcceptStats    130.75.72.0/80
> 
> On  130.75.72.36 I have defined in httpd.conf:
> [...]
>   UnixSocketDir /var/backhand/backhand
>   MulticastStats 130.75.72.14:4445,1
>   AcceptStats 130.75.72.0/80
> 
> Looking at /backhand/:
> http://bermuda.geog.uni-hannover.de/backhand/
> 0 bermuda.geog.uni-hannover.de 973765382 130.75.72.36:80 200900608  49161408 0/0 0 [0] 501697 1 0.000000/1 0.000000
> (color red)
> 
> the www (aka hgeo02) is not seen...
> 
> Same comparing situation on www.geog.uni-hannover.de
> http://www.geog.uni-hannover.de/cgi-bin/backhand-test
> -> o.k.
> http://bermuda.geog.uni-hannover.de/cgi-bin/backhand-test
> -> o.k.

This is fine.

> Using
>  MulticastStats 225.220.221.20:4445,1
> on both servers backhand is running. But I am afraid that I am not allowed
> to use this address... Or is it reserved for such activities?
> nslookup tells me: 225.220.221.20: Non-existent host/domain. Or do I
> have to calculate a proper address due to my network?
> 
> I would be glad if you could tell me about the MulticastStats secret
> (and maybe put an live example onto the FAQ).

This is fine to.. IP's in the range: (224.0.0.0- 239.255.255.255) are reserved
for IP mulicast.  They are routed differently and are not *allowed* to be
assigned to a machine.  So you can use 225.220.221.20 without much problem. 
The other option is to use your broadcast address.

The only time you need to specify *two* arguments to MulticastStats is when
you have more than one IP address assigned to a machine and mod_backhand
"chooses" the wrong one.  I don't think you'll need to bother with this right
now.

> PS: Final question: If backhand is running (as it did with the
> 225.220.221.20 address), how can I test the environment? Run some
> CPU-intensive application on the main server? Or generate many web
> accesses (how to do that?)? Just curious...

One easy way to tell if it is wokring is to use the byLoad candidacy function
and (assuming the servers are both unloaded) run "perl -e 'while(1) {;}'" on
one server. This will drive the load up on that machine.  Make some requests
to that machine and they should be services by the other machine.  There is a
backhand-test cgi that comes with mod_backhand... It will tell you where you
entered the cluster and how eventually serviced your request.

Try httperf or apache's "ab".

Hmmm, I am working on a project called daiquiri that will re run Apache common
logs against a cluster of web servers (or just one) and you can "multiply" the
log times a factor (make every request twice or a hundred times)...  It is
available out of CVS at :pserver:anonymous at commedia.cnds.jhu.edu:/storage/cvs
and the module is called daiquiri.  If you don't know how to use CVS, I am
afraid that you will have to wait for the first public release which isn't yet
scheduled.

--
Theo Schlossnagle
1024D/A8EBCF8F/13BD 8C08 6BE2 629A 527E  2DC2 72C2 AD05 A8EB CF8F
2047R/33131B65/71 F7 95 64 49 76 5D BA  3D 90 B9 9F BE 27 24 E7



From theos at cnds.jhu.edu  Thu Nov  9 13:16:53 2000
From: theos at cnds.jhu.edu (Theo E. Schlossnagle)
Date: Thu, 09 Nov 2000 13:16:53 -0500
Subject: [mod_backhand-users] Obscure mail traffic with backhand?
References: <E13tXND-00077R-00@longsword.omniti.com> <20001108163135.B7970@hgeo02.geog.uni-hannover.de> <3A09BB1C.8CCB12AC@cnds.jhu.edu> <20001109110957.A14390@hgeo02.geog.uni-hannover.de> <20001109112151.A14636@hgeo02.geog.uni-hannover.de>
Message-ID: <3A0AEA15.9BC84819@cnds.jhu.edu>

Markus Neteler wrote:
> when configuratin both servers to
> MulticastStats 225.220.221.20:4445,1
> 
> the backhand is running. But am I allowed to use
> this address?

Yes, you can use any address in the assigned IP Multicast block
224.0.0.0->239.255.255.255

You can also use your broadcast address (leave the ,1 off the end though). 
Multicast is often more effecient than broadcast.  That is why the option
exists.

> "ethereal" is telling me:
> bermuda.geog.uni-hannover.de  225.220.221.20 UDP Source port: upnotify  Destination port: upnotify
> www.geog.uni-hannover.de      225.220.221.20 UDP Source port: upnotify  Destination port: upnotify

Apparently 225.220.221.20 is assigned to upnotify...  Doesn't bother me :-)

--
Theo Schlossnagle
1024D/A8EBCF8F/13BD 8C08 6BE2 629A 527E  2DC2 72C2 AD05 A8EB CF8F
2047R/33131B65/71 F7 95 64 49 76 5D BA  3D 90 B9 9F BE 27 24 E7



From madmax at express.ru  Fri Nov 10 11:07:06 2000
From: madmax at express.ru (Maxim Kozin)
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 19:07:06 +0300 (MSK)
Subject: [mod_backhand-users] socket:: No buffer space available
In-Reply-To: <3A072C71.AFD7B1E2@cnds.jhu.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.05.10011101814000.64392-100000@ds.express.ru>

On Mon, 6 Nov 2000, Theo E. Schlossnagle wrote:

> The no buffer space available sounds like you are running our of mbufs.  Since
> I am not a BSD guru, I don't really know how to fix this, but I am absolutely
> sure that there is a way (probably with sysctl).
> 
> After running our of mbufs, the connects are probably failing because the
> processes (Child <-> backhand parent) cannot talk over their UNIX domain
> sockets that live in the UnixSocketDir.  This my guess as to what is going on.
> 
> The following could be blatant display of my ignorance of BSD, but you might
> want to look at:
> 
> kern.maxfiles: 1064
> kern.ipc.maxsockbuf: 262144
> kern.ipc.nmbclusters: 1024
> kern.ipc.mbuf_wait: 32
> kern.ipc.nmbufs: 4096
> kern.ipc.maxsockets: 1064

	Hello.

 On both mashines kernel parametrs about identical.
On first host "No buffer space available" never occured, while on second -
after 5-10 hours  apahce+mod_nackhand work.
 Moreover, on second host running  much less process which can use mbufs -
exim, pop and  httpd.

b.r.
 Kozin Maxim




From trig at drunk-admins.com  Sat Nov 11 02:17:02 2000
From: trig at drunk-admins.com (jason)
Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2000 01:17:02 -0600
Subject: [mod_backhand-users] just starting
Message-ID: <20001111011702.A25875@drunk-admins.com>

o.k.
I just loaded mod_backhand onto one of our apache servers today.
Really cool concept and sounds great. Does anyone have this running in
an environment where it would load balance for Windows 2000 web
servers running IIS 5.0? Any suggestions for getting it to work in the
scenario?


Jason                   800Hosting.com
jason at drunk-admins.com



From neteler at geog.uni-hannover.de  Sat Nov 11 08:53:09 2000
From: neteler at geog.uni-hannover.de (Markus Neteler)
Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2000 13:53:09 +0000
Subject: [mod_backhand-users] Obscure mail traffic with backhand?
In-Reply-To: <3A0AE925.8EA45969@cnds.jhu.edu>; from theos@cnds.jhu.edu on Thu, Nov 09, 2000 at 01:12:53PM -0500
References: <E13tXND-00077R-00@longsword.omniti.com> <20001108163135.B7970@hgeo02.geog.uni-hannover.de> <3A09BB1C.8CCB12AC@cnds.jhu.edu> <20001109110957.A14390@hgeo02.geog.uni-hannover.de> <3A0AE925.8EA45969@cnds.jhu.edu>
Message-ID: <20001111135309.D16442@hgeo02.geog.uni-hannover.de>

Theo,

thanks for your useful explanations! It seems the obscure traffic
was there for any other reason (mhh, better I don't knwo why).


On Thu, Nov 09, 2000 at 01:12:53PM -0500, Theo E. Schlossnagle wrote:
[...]
> > PS: Final question: If backhand is running (as it did with the
> > 225.220.221.20 address), how can I test the environment? Run some
> > CPU-intensive application on the main server? Or generate many web
> > accesses (how to do that?)? Just curious...
> 
> One easy way to tell if it is wokring is to use the byLoad candidacy function
> and (assuming the servers are both unloaded) run "perl -e 'while(1) {;}'" on
> one server. This will drive the load up on that machine.  Make some requests
> to that machine and they should be services by the other machine.  There is a
> backhand-test cgi that comes with mod_backhand... It will tell you where you
> entered the cluster and how eventually serviced your request.
Yes, I have seen that script. 

> Try httperf or apache's "ab".

To test performance I tried:
httperf --server=www.geog.uni-hannover.de  --num-conns=1000 --num-calls=1000

Still the cgi-script tells me that www would be serving my request.
I am unable to drive the load such high to get backhand moving my requests
to the other machine :-)

Funny thing is that:
http://www.geog.uni-hannover.de/backhand/

says: #ready/#used servers: 0/0

Although the machine is running properly. Mhhh.

Sorry to bother you here again, perhaps you have an idea for that.

> Hmmm, I am working on a project called daiquiri that will re run Apache common
> logs against a cluster of web servers (or just one) and you can "multiply" the
> log times a factor (make every request twice or a hundred times)...  It is
> available out of CVS at :pserver:anonymous at commedia.cnds.jhu.edu:/storage/cvs
> and the module is called daiquiri.  If you don't know how to use CVS, I am
> afraid that you will have to wait for the first public release which isn't yet
> scheduled.
I am rather familiar with CVS, so I may try it. Thanks for the info.

Kind regards

 Markus



From rael at wibble.org.uk  Sat Nov 11 08:38:59 2000
From: rael at wibble.org.uk (Colin May)
Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2000 13:38:59 +0000
Subject: [mod_backhand-users] Obscure mail traffic with backhand?
In-Reply-To: <20001111135309.D16442@hgeo02.geog.uni-hannover.de>; from neteler@geog.uni-hannover.de on Sat, Nov 11, 2000 at 01:53:09PM +0000
References: <E13tXND-00077R-00@longsword.omniti.com> <20001108163135.B7970@hgeo02.geog.uni-hannover.de> <3A09BB1C.8CCB12AC@cnds.jhu.edu> <20001109110957.A14390@hgeo02.geog.uni-hannover.de> <3A0AE925.8EA45969@cnds.jhu.edu> <20001111135309.D16442@hgeo02.geog.uni-hannover.de>
Message-ID: <20001111133859.A32433@wibble.org.uk>

Quoting Markus Neteler (Sat, Nov 11, 2000 at 01:53:09PM +0000)

> http://www.geog.uni-hannover.de/backhand/
> says: #ready/#used servers: 0/0 
> Although the machine is running properly. Mhhh.

apachectl graceful   will "fix" that

Colin.

-- 

Colin May - rael at wibble.org.uk - http://www.wibble.org.uk
"Look across at dreamland and tell me what you see..."



From theos at cnds.jhu.edu  Sat Nov 11 15:31:56 2000
From: theos at cnds.jhu.edu (Theo E. Schlossnagle)
Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2000 15:31:56 -0500
Subject: [mod_backhand-users] Obscure mail traffic with backhand?
References: <E13tXND-00077R-00@longsword.omniti.com> <20001108163135.B7970@hgeo02.geog.uni-hannover.de> <3A09BB1C.8CCB12AC@cnds.jhu.edu> <20001109110957.A14390@hgeo02.geog.uni-hannover.de> <3A0AE925.8EA45969@cnds.jhu.edu> <20001111135309.D16442@hgeo02.geog.uni-hannover.de>
Message-ID: <3A0DACBC.A0BDE600@cnds.jhu.edu>

Markus Neteler wrote:
> Funny thing is that:
> http://www.geog.uni-hannover.de/backhand/
> says: #ready/#used servers: 0/0
> Although the machine is running properly. Mhhh.
> Sorry to bother you here again, perhaps you have an idea for that.

It is the last question on the FAQ :-)

http://backhand.org/mod_backhand/FAQ.shtml#question13

--
Theo Schlossnagle
1024D/A8EBCF8F/13BD 8C08 6BE2 629A 527E  2DC2 72C2 AD05 A8EB CF8F
2047R/33131B65/71 F7 95 64 49 76 5D BA  3D 90 B9 9F BE 27 24 E7



From neteler at geog.uni-hannover.de  Sun Nov 12 03:30:40 2000
From: neteler at geog.uni-hannover.de (Markus Neteler)
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 08:30:40 +0000
Subject: [mod_backhand-users] Obscure mail traffic with backhand?
In-Reply-To: <3A0DACBC.A0BDE600@cnds.jhu.edu>; from theos@cnds.jhu.edu on Sat, Nov 11, 2000 at 03:31:56PM -0500
References: <E13tXND-00077R-00@longsword.omniti.com> <20001108163135.B7970@hgeo02.geog.uni-hannover.de> <3A09BB1C.8CCB12AC@cnds.jhu.edu> <20001109110957.A14390@hgeo02.geog.uni-hannover.de> <3A0AE925.8EA45969@cnds.jhu.edu> <20001111135309.D16442@hgeo02.geog.uni-hannover.de> <3A0DACBC.A0BDE600@cnds.jhu.edu>
Message-ID: <20001112083040.B2725@hgeo02.geog.uni-hannover.de>

On Sat, Nov 11, 2000 at 03:31:56PM -0500, Theo E. Schlossnagle wrote:
> Markus Neteler wrote:
> > Funny thing is that:
> > http://www.geog.uni-hannover.de/backhand/
> > says: #ready/#used servers: 0/0
> > Although the machine is running properly. Mhhh.
> > Sorry to bother you here again, perhaps you have an idea for that.
> 
> It is the last question on the FAQ :-)
> 
> http://backhand.org/mod_backhand/FAQ.shtml#question13
Oops. Sorry for that.

But if you are interested in background information as your are
working on that:
  
- in the first try of backhand, when it was working (before I
  pained you with mails), the number of servers was correct (SUN)
- restarting apache does not help... Maybe I have to reboot
  the machine.

Never mind. If this wrong numer does not hinder backhand to work,
it does not matter.

Thanks for your patience

 Markus



> 
> --
> Theo Schlossnagle
> 1024D/A8EBCF8F/13BD 8C08 6BE2 629A 527E  2DC2 72C2 AD05 A8EB CF8F
> 2047R/33131B65/71 F7 95 64 49 76 5D BA  3D 90 B9 9F BE 27 24 E7
> 
> _______________________________________________
> backhand-users mailing list
> backhand-users at lists.backhand.org
> http://lists.backhand.org/mailman/listinfo/backhand-users

-- 
Dipl.-Geogr. Markus Neteler *  University of Hannover
Institute of Physical Geography and Landscape Ecology
Schneiderberg 50 * D-30167 Hannover * Germany
Tel: ++49-(0)511-762-4494  Fax: -3984