POUND AND ZOPE HELL!!! was: Re: [Zope] Can't Find This Bug!
To summarize, I'm newly using Pound as a reverse-proxy for Zope. I'm using VHM mapping to pass the requests to the appropriate folders in Zope. I have some clients who can't see their sites, but I and many others can. They get this message: "Zope \n Welcome to Web.vi" which is my site (web.vi). I can see the sites just fine. And I can't find a bug anywhere!!! jens wrote:
"Posted with no comments"?? You can read, can you? This is now the third time (read: 3) that I'm telling you that these entries are not errors. NotFound (or 404) is completely normal. Stop looking at them!
Okay, okay, BUT JENS... It's been over a WEEK that my client can't see her site AND I DON'T KNOW WHY!! Here's what I'm doing: * Checking the error log for messages. The only ones I get are the ones you say are normal (even with those brackets "[" and "]", right?) * Checking the Z2.log and find nothing amiss. * What else should I check? I'm desperate! Please understand!! Here are examples (to which Jens complains) from Z2.log of client sites that apparently don't render for many people trying to hit them, but these examples look perfectly normal to me: 202.71.106.119 - Anonymous [16/Aug/2006:00:27:36 +0000] "GET /800/s/c/x/en-us/EMarket/Our_Store/marketItems/fetchPhotoThumb?s ku=F-0400 HTTP/1.1" 200 24163 "http://blackbeardale.com/800/s/c/x/en-us/EMarket/Our_Store/Main_frame.pt?cat..." "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1)" 202.71.106.119 - Anonymous [16/Aug/2006:00:27:36 +0000] "GET /800/s/c/x/en-us/EMarket/Our_Store/marketItems/fetchPhotoThumb?s ku=F-0450 HTTP/1.1" 200 12894 "http://blackbeardale.com/800/s/c/x/en-us/EMarket/Our_Store/Main_frame.pt?cat..." "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1)" 202.71.106.119 - Anonymous [16/Aug/2006:00:27:37 +0000] "GET /800/s/c/x/en-us/EMarket/Our_Store/marketItems/fetchPhotoThumb?s ku=F-0480 HTTP/1.1" 200 37165 "http://blackbeardale.com/800/s/c/x/en-us/EMarket/Our_Store/Main_frame.pt?cat..." "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1)" 202.71.106.119 - Anonymous [16/Aug/2006:00:27:37 +0000] "GET /800/s/c/x/en-us/EMarket/Our_Store/marketItems/fetchPhotoThumb?s ku=F-0500 HTTP/1.1" 200 15901 "http://blackbeardale.com/800/s/c/x/en-us/EMarket/Our_Store/Main_frame.pt?cat..." "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1)"
To be honest, looking at the insane JavaScript stuff that you invoke several times over before even showing any content I am surprised anyone can view the site. You should ditch all the useless code that tries several times over to guess screen sizes. If you actually paid someone to write that steaming pile of JavaScript you need to get a lawyer.
Sorry you don't like my JS, Jens. I'm happy with it. But I thought perhaps it might be somehow interfere with the rendering of the site for the client, even though it hadn't before I went to Pound. So I replaced it with a bare-bones DTML page for the index_html and it still didn't render for the client. 3 TIA, beno --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail Beta.
--On 16. August 2006 07:34:26 -0700 beno - <purabachata@yahoo.com> wrote:
To summarize, I'm newly using Pound as a reverse-proxy for Zope. I'm using VHM mapping to pass the requests to the appropriate folders in Zope. I have some clients who can't see their sites, but I and many others can. They get this message: "Zope \n Welcome to Web.vi" which is my site (web.vi). I can see the sites just fine. And I can't find a bug anywhere!!!
Could you please be so kind and stick to some general mailing nlist rules like not shouting in the subject and using a self-speaking subject? These rules also apply to you. If you don't want think the rules apply to you, don't use this list. -aj
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 16 Aug 2006, at 10:34, beno - wrote:
"Posted with no comments"?? You can read, can you? This is now the third time (read: 3) that I'm telling you that these entries are not errors. NotFound (or 404) is completely normal. Stop looking at them!
Okay, okay, BUT JENS... It's been over a WEEK that my client can't see her site AND I DON'T KNOW WHY!!
That's beside the point. I'm telling you those NotFound messages do not matter, you need to look somewhere else. Whether you are desperate or not does not change the fact that they are a red herring. If someone who cannot view the site sends a request and Zope seems to serve the right stuff then maybe this is not a Zope problem at all? I suggest you read up on things like ethereal to analyze what exactly is happening between the client's browser and the server. The logs can only tell you that "something has been served", not the content. jens -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Darwin) iD8DBQFE4zQ9RAx5nvEhZLIRAhr7AJ43qXAxSe5kPO3v+fMlxiAZyTZ0tgCfR2SU HIlCBPaXSSZwH2SN/bspDf4= =9QYm -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
----- Original Message ----- From: "Jens Vagelpohl" <jens@dataflake.org> To: "[Zope] Mailing List" <zope@zope.org> Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2006 11:05 AM Subject: Re: POUND AND ZOPE HELL!!! was: Re: [Zope] Can't Find This Bug!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 16 Aug 2006, at 10:34, beno - wrote:
"Posted with no comments"?? You can read, can you? This is now the third time (read: 3) that I'm telling you that these entries are not errors. NotFound (or 404) is completely normal. Stop looking at them!
Okay, okay, BUT JENS... It's been over a WEEK that my client can't see her site AND I DON'T KNOW WHY!!
That's beside the point. I'm telling you those NotFound messages do not matter, you need to look somewhere else. Whether you are desperate or not does not change the fact that they are a red herring.
If someone who cannot view the site sends a request and Zope seems to serve the right stuff then maybe this is not a Zope problem at all?
I suggest you read up on things like ethereal to analyze what exactly is happening between the client's browser and the server. The logs can only tell you that "something has been served", not the content.
Another idea is to have your client install ieHTTPHeaders (or equivalent for non-IE browsers) in their web browser and then send you the http header info that they are seeing. Jonathan
On Aug 16, 2006, at 11:13 AM, Jonathan wrote:
Another idea is to have your client install ieHTTPHeaders (or equivalent for non-IE browsers) in their web browser and then send you the http header info that they are seeing.
The Mozilla equivalent is LiveHTTPHeaders <http:// livehttpheaders.mozdev.org/> Also, Shane Hathaway's tcpwatch <http://hathawaymix.org/Software/ TCPWatch> is another option and can be used with any browser that allows the user to set an HTTP proxy. (Which essentially means supported by any browser.)
So... * I cannot find any IP addresses in Z2.log that these clients would be using to access their sites. * I can find plenty of examples of my own IP address, so I know it's logging correctly. Therefore, it would appear that the requests coming from these clients aren't reaching Zope. DO YOU AGREE WITH THAT CONCLUSION? However, if they *aren't* reaching Zope, why do they receive a screen message like this: "Zope \n Welcome to Web.vi" where web.vi is my personal site? TIA, beno --------------------------------- Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1¢/min.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 16 Aug 2006, at 11:35, beno - wrote:
So... * I cannot find any IP addresses in Z2.log that these clients would be using to access their sites. * I can find plenty of examples of my own IP address, so I know it's logging correctly. Therefore, it would appear that the requests coming from these clients aren't reaching Zope. DO YOU AGREE WITH THAT CONCLUSION?
However, if they *aren't* reaching Zope, why do they receive a screen message like this: "Zope \n Welcome to Web.vi" where web.vi is my personal site?
Instead of continuing to stab in the dark, which you have been doing the whole time, you need to spend the time to get familiar with the tools you are using and with basic troubleshooting techniques. You're just jumping from one unfounded conclusion to the next and waste your own and your clients time. jens -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Darwin) iD8DBQFE4zxkRAx5nvEhZLIRAnbfAJoDMDXiYS4saPHVsIvKYa0tb7RHUQCgkGHc 4kBu/xEfvW65wly3/81+EKU= =Lbg3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
3 Jens Vagelpohl <jens@dataflake.org> wrote: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Instead of continuing to stab in the dark, which you have been doing the whole time, you need to spend the time to get familiar with the tools you are using and with basic troubleshooting techniques. Wonderful, Jens. So, what do you suggest? I would have thought Z2.py and/or the error logs would help me out here, but they aren't. Apparently, these aren't the tools I should be using, but what are if these aren't?? --------------------------------- Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2¢/min or less.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 16 Aug 2006, at 12:11, beno - wrote:
Instead of continuing to stab in the dark, which you have been doing the whole time, you need to spend the time to get familiar with the tools you are using and with basic troubleshooting techniques.
Wonderful, Jens. So, what do you suggest? I would have thought Z2.py and/or the error logs would help me out here, but they aren't. Apparently, these aren't the tools I should be using, but what are if these aren't??
You're still not reading or understanding what people tell you to do. It's like talking to a wall. I suggested using network traffic analysis with e.g. ethereal to analyze the traffic between your server and the problematic client's browser. Other posters also suggested browser tools like Mozilla/FireFox LiveHTTPHeaders and similar products for IE to analyze headers that are sent back and forth between the problematic browser and your server. jens -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Darwin) iD8DBQFE40c2RAx5nvEhZLIRAhfJAKCFAZtCMThnwcQG2wZ+tfnMKzuimwCeKD2e gtsSTqkY4rbue48mLjLXVm4= =0kcZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On 16 Aug 2006, at 11:35, beno - wrote:
So... * I cannot find any IP addresses in Z2.log that these clients would be using to access their sites. * I can find plenty of examples of my own IP address, so I know it's logging correctly. Therefore, it would appear that the requests coming from these clients aren't reaching Zope. DO YOU AGREE WITH THAT CONCLUSION?
Probably. (Note that Z2.log only includes requests for which a response is sent to the client. If for some reason a response is not sent (e.g. the zope thread hangs, or the client disconnects) nothing will be logged even though a request did reach zope. But this may not be relevant to your situation, I don't know.) I've not used Pound. Does it log IP addresses? Have you looked at that log?
However, if they *aren't* reaching Zope, why do they receive a screen message like this: "Zope \n Welcome to Web.vi" where web.vi is my personal site?
This is not a message that a default zope installation creates. So where does it come from? I've no idea. Is it possible that you've configured something other than zope to generate such a message? e.g. pound? -- Paul Winkler http://www.slinkp.com
Could it be that the combination of Pound and VHM are mapping your client's connection to your personal website? Does your pesonal website have a splash screen that presents "Zope \n Welcome to Web.vi"? If so, you should be able to find the log enties and get a bit more information. Pound has several logging options which may also be helpful. As several folks here have noted, you need to approach this problem systematically. You need to try to trace what is happending using the tool that are available. On Wed, 16 Aug 2006, beno - wrote:
So... * I cannot find any IP addresses in Z2.log that these clients would be using to access their sites. * I can find plenty of examples of my own IP address, so I know it's logging correctly. Therefore, it would appear that the requests coming from these clients aren't reaching Zope. DO YOU AGREE WITH THAT CONCLUSION?
However, if they *aren't* reaching Zope, why do they receive a screen message like this: "Zope \n Welcome to Web.vi" where web.vi is my personal site?
TIA, beno
--------------------------------- Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1¢/min.
--
beno - wrote:
Therefore, it would appear that the requests coming from these clients aren't reaching Zope. DO YOU AGREE WITH THAT CONCLUSION?
However, if they *aren't* reaching Zope, why do they receive a screen message like this: "Zope \n Welcome to Web.vi" where web.vi is my personal site?
That seems to be a page you have set up in the root of your Zope instance. You get if you access the server by IP: http://202.71.106.119 http://202.71.106.119:8080/ And it is served out of Zope. Here is the HTTP response: --- HTTP/1.x 200 OK Server: Zope/(Zope 2.7.8-final, python 2.3.5, freebsd5) ZServer/1.1 Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 06:29:33 GMT Content-Length: 164 Content-Type: text/html --- Any chance your unlucky clients are using another domain or subdomain to reach the site? A domain/subdomain that are not picked up by VHM which could be why Zope is serving from its root? /Anton
On Wed, 16 Aug 2006, beno - wrote:
To summarize, I'm newly using Pound as a reverse-proxy for Zope. I'm using VHM mapping to pass the requests to the appropriate folders in Zope. I have some clients who can't see their sites, but I and many others can. They get this message: "Zope \n Welcome to Web.vi" which is my site (web.vi). I can see the sites just fine. And I can't find a bug anywhere!!!
beno -- Have you checked your Poound configuration file and your VHM configuration? I suspect that your problems lie there and not in Zope, per se. One thing to be wary about although I am not sure whether it is the source of your problem the order in which thing appear in the Pouond contifugation file. The regular expressions are applied sequentially in the order they appear in the configuration file, first match wins. You also should be sure you have a default in the Pound configuration. Also, since VHM is a match/rewrite system on the URLs, you need to be sure that what you are generating from Pound matches VHM's expectations. BTW, which version of Pound are you using? -d
33 Dennis Allison <allison@shasta.stanford.edu> wrote: On Wed, 16 Aug 2006, beno - wrote: Have you checked your Poound configuration file Since it sounds like you know something about Pound, here's a snip from the pound.cfg file: Service HeadRequire "Host: .*mrtablecloth-vi.com.*" BackEnd Address 202.71.106.119 Port 8080 End End which is then mapped via VHM like this: mrtablecloth-vi.com/mrtablecloth-vi.com and the name of the client file in root is indeed "mrtablecloth-vi.com". Again, I can hit this site just fine, so why can't the client? One thing to be wary about although I am not sure whether it is the source of your problem the order in which thing appear in the Pouond contifugation file. The regular expressions are applied sequentially in the order they appear in the configuration file, first match wins. You also should be sure you have a default in the Pound configuration. I don't use any regex in that file. Also, since VHM is a match/rewrite system on the URLs, you need to be sure that what you are generating from Pound matches VHM's expectations. Answered above. BTW, which version of Pound are you using? 2.1 TIA, beno --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Next-gen email? Have it all with the all-new Yahoo! Mail Beta.
participants (8)
-
Andreas Jung -
Andrew Langmead -
Anton Stonor -
beno - -
Dennis Allison -
Jens Vagelpohl -
Jonathan -
Paul Winkler