Re: Recommending 3.0.19

"sub paul" <[email protected]> Thu, 22 Jun 2006 10:30:11 -0700
Newsgroups gmane.text.xml.resin.user
Message-ID <[email protected]>
------=_Part_27446_13835562.1150997411619
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

I would like to also say that 3.0.19 has been the most stable version for
me.. I had some random issues with 3.0.18 that I could not reproduce on a
different system, but they were gone in 3.0.19. All I did was upgraded the
version.

Issue was around apache not forwarding requests to resin. so everything was
browse able.. When I did caucho-status though, it found that resin was
running, but it didn't have proper uris mapped.

I couldn't reproduce it and didn't find the need because 3.0.19 fixed it. At
one time 3.0.18 worked like a charm too.. Its just that one day it decided
to stop working with apache.

Paul

On 6/20/06, Jentsch, Olaf <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> So it seems to me, until now our production server ist running and running
> and running...
> - no more OutOfMemoryError in perm space (the server is generating
> permanently new jsp-pages, but the perm space could be cleaned
> periodically,
> what shows the garbage collection log)
> - reliable log rotation
> - even no other error
>
> From our perspective would be given the same recommendation!
>
> Keep at it!
>
> Olaf Jentsch
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Mattias Jiderhamn [mailto:[email protected]]
> > Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 10:38 AM
> > To: [email protected]; [email protected]
> > Subject: Recommending 3.0.19
> >
> > At 2006-06-14 19:11, Scott Ferguson wrote:
> > >>That seems a lot more like it by the looks of things. Any
> > idea on when
> > >>3.0.20 is going to be released?
> > >
> > >Roughly 4-6 weeks.  There are still quite a few bugs to work
> > through,
> > >though, so it might change.
> >
> > Speaking of this, I must say that after a few weeks with
> > 3.0.19 in production it seems to be really stable. All the
> > bugs we have seen after the upgrade to 3.0.x have been fixed.
> > From our perspective, I would recommend anyone using 2.1 and
> > considering 3.0 to aim for 3.0.19.
> >
> > Well done guys!
> >
> >
>
>

------=_Part_27446_13835562.1150997411619
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

I would like to also say that 3.0.19 has been the most stable version for me.. I had some random issues with 3.0.18 that I could not reproduce on a different system, but they were gone in 3.0.19. All I did was upgraded the version.
<br><br>Issue was around apache not forwarding requests to resin. so everything was browse able.. When I did caucho-status though, it found that resin was running, but it didn't have proper uris mapped.<br><br>I couldn't reproduce it and didn't find the need because 
3.0.19 fixed it. At one time 3.0.18 worked like a charm too.. Its just that one day it decided to stop working with apache.<br><br>Paul<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 6/20/06, <b class="gmail_sendername">Jentsch, Olaf
</b> &lt;<a href="mailto:[email protected]">[email protected]</a>&gt; wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
So it seems to me, until now our production server ist running and running<br>and running...<br>- no more OutOfMemoryError in perm space (the server is generating<br>permanently new jsp-pages, but the perm space could be cleaned periodically,
<br>what shows the garbage collection log)<br>- reliable log rotation<br>- even no other error<br><br>From our perspective would be given the same recommendation!<br><br>Keep at it!<br><br>Olaf Jentsch<br><br>&gt; -----Original Message-----
<br>&gt; From: Mattias Jiderhamn [mailto:<a href="mailto:[email protected]">[email protected]</a>]<br>&gt; Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 10:38 AM<br>&gt; To: <a href="mailto:[email protected]">
[email protected]</a>; <a href="mailto:[email protected]">[email protected]</a><br>&gt; Subject: Recommending 3.0.19<br>&gt;<br>&gt; At 2006-06-14 19:11, Scott Ferguson wrote:<br>&gt; &gt;&gt;That seems a lot more like it by the looks of things. Any
<br>&gt; idea on when<br>&gt; &gt;&gt;3.0.20 is going to be released?<br>&gt; &gt;<br>&gt; &gt;Roughly 4-6 weeks.&nbsp;&nbsp;There are still quite a few bugs to work<br>&gt; through,<br>&gt; &gt;though, so it might change.<br>&gt;<br>
&gt; Speaking of this, I must say that after a few weeks with<br>&gt; 3.0.19 in production it seems to be really stable. All the<br>&gt; bugs we have seen after the upgrade to 3.0.x have been fixed.<br>&gt; From our perspective, I would recommend anyone using 
2.1 and<br>&gt; considering 3.0 to aim for 3.0.19.<br>&gt;<br>&gt; Well done guys!<br>&gt;<br>&gt;<br><br></blockquote></div><br>

------=_Part_27446_13835562.1150997411619--