- From: Henrik Nordstrom <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>
- Date: Wed, 02 Sep 2009 11:02:07 +0200
- To: "Svensson, Lars" <l.svensson@d-nb.de>
- Cc: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
ons 2009-09-02 klockan 08:53 +0200 skrev Svensson, Lars: > At my place we're a bit unsure of the use of Status Code 500. One of our > apps (a distributed one) returns a SC 500 when there is a communication > errror with one of the subsystems. Sounds reasonable to me. 500 is "unspecified server failure". > This caused problems when we upgraded > our Tomcats to use load-balancing, since the mod-jk now thinks the > Tomcat returning SC 500 isn't responding properly and switches the > session to the other Tomcat instance. Also sounds reasonable for a load balancer configured to hide server errors. but it should not mark the server permanently down/malfunctioning only because of an isolated failure.. > If the user now repeats the same > action and the communication error is still there -- leading to a 500 > again--, the mod-jk will block both Tomcats and the user cannot login > again. Sounds like a mod-jk defect to me. > So: Is 500 the correct error code to send in this case and -- if not -- > which one should I use? 500 is quite suitable. Or alternatively 503. Regards Henrik
Received on Wednesday, 2 September 2009 09:02:56 UTC