Copied to clipboard

Flag this post as spam?

This post will be reported to the moderators as potential spam to be looked at


  • philw 99 posts 434 karma points
    May 23, 2015 @ 00:26
    philw
    0

    ERROR 500?

    2015-05-22 17:13:20,962 [76] ERROR Umbraco.Web.Scheduling.KeepAlive - [Thread 95]
    Error in ping. The base url used in the request was: http://XXXXX.com:80/umbraco/,
    see http://our.umbraco.org/documentation/Using-Umbraco/Config-files/umbracoSettings/#ScheduledTasks documentation for details on setting a baseUrl if this is in error
    System.Net.WebException: The remote server returned an error: (500) Internal Server Error.
       at System.Net.WebClient.DownloadDataInternal(Uri address, WebRequest& request)
       at System.Net.WebClient.DownloadString(Uri address)
       at System.Net.WebClient.DownloadString(String address)
       at Umbraco.Web.Scheduling.KeepAlive.Start(ApplicationContext appContext, IUmbracoSettingsSection settings)
    

    I did check the link but it's not hugely helpful. I can see old issues relating to this but nothing quite like what I have.

    The symptoms are site working perfectly except when I hit the /umbraco url I get a cold grey error 500. Not a yellow screen of death, a really serious error 500.

    Does anyone have any ideas?

    Background I've been running a Beta site of U7.2.5 on Racksapce (SQL Server 2014 back end, latest everything) for some days and it's stable and fine. Note that Rackspace is notorious for weird things, so this all could be them - I have a ticket open and perhaps that will help.

    Today I downloaded the Beta site, then back-uploaded it to the actual live site. There are only two differences in the live site versus the beta:

    1. It has a nested IIS application. Therefore during the deployment I wrapped the sections of the web.config which need it in inheritInChildApplications="false", and added that application directory to umbracoReservedPaths.
    2. The actual site has an SSL cert, although this is only used for the nested application. I think this is irrelevant.

    Note that both Beta and actual sites are still alive (and using the same SQL Server back end) and both serve pages fine, but when I try to hit /umbraco/ to manage the site on the standard url I get error 500. If I hit the same page on the Beta site url it's fine.

    The URL in that error message is correct, although you don't need the port 80. I can still manage the site from the Beta URL (they share the same back end) although obviously only changes to the DB are shared, so I need to get it working properly.

  • philw 99 posts 434 karma points
    May 23, 2015 @ 10:22
    philw
    0

    Ok, so I'm thinking that I have two things here:

    1. These log entries which say... there was an error 500 when hitting http://xxx.com/Umbraco/ and maybe that url is wrong.
    2. The fact that if I hit /Umbraco with my browser, I get an error 500.

    Therefore (1) is a side effect of (2). The real problem is why that /Umbraco page is crashing. And that one I have no log entry for. I guess I can try to reinstall everything, that's all I can think of...

  • philw 99 posts 434 karma points
    May 23, 2015 @ 10:36
    philw
    100

    GOT IT: It's an Application Inheritance issue I removed the inheritInChildApplications="false" stuff which I'd used to protect my nested application and the back end then works fine. This must have changed form 7.1 somehow.

    On a test machine, the 500 error is actually: HTTP Error 500.22 - Internal Server Error An ASP.NET setting has been detected that does not apply in Integrated managed pipeline mode. And it comes from preventing inheritance around the system.webserver section.

    Fix: prevent inheritance in child applications of everything as before, except this one:

      <system.webServer>
        <validation validateIntegratedModeConfiguration="false" />
      </system.webServer>
    

    Just leave that alone (let children do what they will with it) and it works.

Please Sign in or register to post replies

Write your reply to:

Draft