nginx... why do I need the additional location block? -


i wondering if clarify why adding did able fix problem although problem fixed, i'm not sure why works , wasn't working in setup before.

the old setup:

i have files served @ following address: http://192.168.33.1:3000/bower_components/... e.g., (http://192.168.33.1:3000/bower_components/animate.css/animate.css)

i have nginx reverse proxy set @ http://192.168.33.10:80/

i have following location block:

location /content {    proxy_pass http://192.168.33.1:3000/;    proxy_redirect off;    proxy_set_header host $host;    proxy_set_header x-real-ip $remote_addr;    proxy_set_header x-forwarded-for $proxy_add_x_forwarded_for;    proxy_max_temp_file_size 0;    client_max_body_size 10m;    client_body_buffer_size 128k;    proxy_connect_timeout 90;    proxy_send_timeout 90;    proxy_read_timeout 90;    proxy_buffer_size 4k;    proxy_buffers 4 32k;    proxy_busy_buffers_size 64k;    proxy_temp_file_write_size 64k; }

in setup, following url load: http://192.168.33.10/content/app/index.css

but following url give me 404, though accessing file directly load fine: http://192.168.33.10/content/bower_components/animate.css/animate.css (or else in bower_components folder matter)

the fix:

after playing around bit found if added following location block, things work:

location /content/bower_components {      proxy_pass http://192.168.33.1:3000/bower_components; }

i understand why additional location block work don't understand why original location block did not encompass rule of addition location block added.

any advise what's going on?

this may or may not correct answer, but...

the location block:

location /content {     proxy_pass http://192.168.33.1:3000/;     ... }

is aliasing uris beginning /content /, missing terminating /.

i use:

location /content/ {     proxy_pass http://192.168.33.1:3000/;     ... }

and fix specific case of /content if need to.

i don't know why http://192.168.33.10/content/app/index.css seems work though.

see this document details.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

jOOQ update returning clause with Oracle -

according http://www.jooq.org/doc/3.8/manual/sql-building/sql-statements/update-statement/ jooq doesn't support returning clause in update statements databases except firebird , postgres. does know, still correct oracle jooq? according oracle's documentation, oracle db supports returning clase delete, insert, or update statements. incorrect manual you're right - manual wrong , should fixed: https://github.com/jooq/jooq/issues/5470 single row update returning jooq 3.8 added support single row update .. returning statements. internally, uses callablestatement , pl/sql block of form: begin update "my_table" set "my_table"."column" = 'xyz' "my_table"."id" = 1 returning "my_table"."id", "my_table"."column" ?, ?; ? := sql%rowcount; end; the relevant issue is: https://github.com/jooq/jooq/issues/5190 multi row update returning a...
Read more

java - Warning equals/hashCode on @Data annotation lombok with inheritance -

i have entity inherits other. on other hand, i'm using lombok project reduce boilerplate code, put @data annotation. annotation @data inheritance produces next warning: generating equals/hashcode implementation without call superclass, though class not extend java.lang.object. if intentional, add '@equalsandhashcode(callsuper=false)' type. is advisable add annotation @equalsandhashcode (callsuper = true) or @equalsandhashcode (callsuper = false) ? if not added, 1 callsuper=false or callsuper=true ? the default value false . 1 if don't specify , ignore warning. yes, recommended add @equalsandhashcode annotation on @data annotated classes extend else object. cannot tell if need true or false , depends on class hierarchy, , need examined on case-by-case basis. however, project or package, can configure in lombok.config call super methods if not direct subclass of object. lombok.equalsandhashcode.callsuper = call for configuration system ...
Read more

java - BasicPathUsageException: Cannot join to attribute of basic type -

i using java 8 jpa (hibernate 5.2.1). have clause works perfectly, until introduce clause make use foreign key table values too. i getting following error: basicpathusageexception: cannot join attribute of basic type i think problem related fact have join table, , not sure how create join using join table. employee - employee_category - category model (employee.java): @manytomany(cascade = cascadetype.all, fetch=fetchtype.eager) @jointable ( name="employee_category", joincolumns={ @joincolumn(name="emp_id", referencedcolumnname="id") }, inversejoincolumns={ @joincolumn(name="cat_id", referencedcolumnname="id") } ) private set<category> categories; model (category.java): @id private string id; jpa when introduce following code, fails error above (i think problem new piece of code): join<t, category> category = from.join("id"); predicates.add(criteriabuilder.like(category....
Read more