Hi Woodchuck,
Am Mittwoch, 18. Mai 2005 21:46 schrieb Woodchuck:
another (simple) way to think about the difference is that Apache
serves static web pages, whereas Tomcat *can* do some server-side
processing and serve dynamic web pages.
all else being equal (and with no mods installed on
Hi -
thanks for that, I hadn't realised that the servlet-name default would
still work in my webapp's web.xml. So I can reverse the logic as you
suggest. Works great.
Tim
Parsons Technical Services wrote:
Look here:
http://jakarta.apache.org/tomcat/tomcat-5.0-doc/default-servlet.html
If you
PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Tomcat vs Apache
I think there is not much question that the Apache server is far more
efficient serving static html. Is there really any issue on that? If
so, things sure have changed. I thought the comparison was like 5 to
1. Is that no longer true
this helps,
Fritz
-Original Message-
From: Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2005 9:39 AM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: Tomcat vs Apache
Apache is not a J2EE container - you are off-roading on this one ;-)
Thanks. That was pretty much what I wanted to find out
(Er, and sorry I just realised I posted __some__ of this as part of a
question on the list last week, but the question I have is now posed
more concretely and wasn't answered then)!
Tim Diggins wrote:
This has been a great and informative thread... I'm wondering now, how
to accomplish what I
See comment in message.
-Message d'origine-
De : Tim Diggins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Envoyé : jeudi 19 mai 2005 13:24
À : Tomcat Users List
Objet : Re: Tomcat vs Apache
(Er, and sorry I just realised I posted __some__ of this as part of a
question on the list last week
Subject: Re: Tomcat vs Apache
(Er, and sorry I just realised I posted __some__ of this as part of a
question on the list last week, but the question I have is now posed more
concretely and wasn't answered then)!
Tim Diggins wrote:
This has been a great and informative thread... I'm wondering now
I think I need to ask a question before offering any information.
When you say applet, do you mean a java applet that runs in a client's
browser window? Or, do you have a web application comprised of
servlets/jsps (or some analogous configuration)?
-Anthony
On May 18, 2005, at 10:37 AM, Chris
If all you're doing is serve static pages, both are equivalent.
However, if you ever need dynamic content, either client or server
side, for example a page whose content is extracted from a database,
or a form for which you need to record the values, you need some kind
of intelligence.
Apache is not a J2EE container - you are off-roading on this one ;-)
Michael
- Original Message -
From: Chris [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Tomcat Users List tomcat-user@jakarta.apache.org
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2005 7:37 AM
Subject: Tomcat vs Apache
I've been working with Tomcat for a while
I think I need to ask a question before offering any information.
When you say applet, do you mean a java applet that runs in a client's
browser window? Or, do you have a web application comprised of
servlets/jsps (or some analogous configuration)?
We have a large java applet that runs in the
If all you're doing is serve static pages, both are equivalent.
However, if you ever need dynamic content, either client or server
side, for example a page whose content is extracted from a database, or
a form for which you need to record the values, you need some kind of
intelligence.
Apache is not a J2EE container - you are off-roading on this one ;-)
Thanks. That was pretty much what I wanted to find out. BTW, I keep
hearing of people using Apache and Tomcat in conjunction. How does that
work?
Chris
-
Chris:
I guess that the applet is just a static file that is served to the
client's browser window. Therefore, ANY web server would work just
fine. There are no appreciable differences between Tomcat and Apache
for your requirements so far. They act very similarly when serving
static content.
Chris wrote:
Ah, okay. The only reason we were considering switching to Apache was
to possibly improve the performance of our Java applet.
The performance of the applet should have nothing to do with the server
that delivers it, unless perhaps the server happens to be downloading
slower than
On 5/18/05, Chris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If all you're doing is serve static pages, both are equivalent.
However, if you ever need dynamic content, either client or server
side, for example a page whose content is extracted from a database, or
a form for which you need to record the
of customers. Some need CGI, some need PHP, and
some need J2EE.
I hope this helps,
Fritz
-Original Message-
From: Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2005 9:39 AM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: Tomcat vs Apache
Apache is not a J2EE container - you are off-roading
The dynamic aspect of Tomcat is used to write HTML dynamically. This
is unrelated to the service of applets. If all you are doing is
serving an applet, you don't need Tomcat, as your HTML is static. I
don't know what some of the other replies mean, but this much is
clear.
On 5/18/05, Anthony
For my own education, what the heck is off-roading?
On 5/18/05, Chris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Apache is not a J2EE container - you are off-roading on this one ;-)
Thanks. That was pretty much what I wanted to find out. BTW, I keep
hearing of people using Apache and Tomcat in conjunction.
I think there is not much question that the Apache server is far more
efficient serving static html. Is there really any issue on that? If
so, things sure have changed. I thought the comparison was like 5 to
1. Is that no longer true?
On 5/18/05, Jason Bainbridge [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On
hihi,
another (simple) way to think about the difference is that Apache
serves static web pages, whereas Tomcat *can* do some server-side
processing and serve dynamic web pages.
all else being equal (and with no mods installed on Apache such as
CGI/SSI/PHP), everyone visiting an Apache hosted
Ah, okay. The only reason we were considering switching to Apache was
to possibly improve the performance of our Java applet.
However the Apache Web Server may well have better performance when
serving large files, I don't believe I have seen any benchmarks
dealing with large files only smaller
According to benchmarks posted a few months ago, depending on your
circumstances, that may no longer be true (or it may even be the
reverse). I don't have the url, but I am sure someone else does, or
search for the benchmark site.
On May 18, 2005, at 1:01 PM, Dakota Jack wrote:
I think
-Original Message-
From: Dakota Jack [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2005 2:01 PM
To: Tomcat Users List; Jason Bainbridge
Subject: Re: Tomcat vs Apache
I think there is not much question that the Apache server is
far more efficient serving static html
From: Dakota Jack [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Tomcat vs Apache
I think there is not much question that the Apache server is far more
efficient serving static html. Is there really any issue on that? If
so, things sure have changed. I thought the comparison was like 5 to
1
Very interesting. Thanks for making the effort and sharing your results.
--
***
* Rick Roberts*
* Advanced Information Technologies, Inc. *
* http://www.ait-web.com *
***
Nice. I'm bookmarking this post for the future. 'Nuf said. Thanks, Yoav!
John
Shapira, Yoav wrote:
Howdy,
Of course not. I'm only regergitating stuff I have read. But I have
seen
it from several different sources, so I took it as truth. Do you have
benchmarks to prove otherwise?
It
It probably bears repeating the link to Craig's analysis of Apache vs
Tomcat standalone and the procedure for determining what is best FOR
YOUR APPLICATION:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=tomcat-userm=104874913017036w=2
BTW - as somebody alluded to earlier, this link was found through the
FAQ,
If you look into the Tomcat archives, this was answered a few days ago. But
to recap, some reasons for running Apache with Tomcat:
1. Apache can handle static pages better (plain HTML).
2. Apache has great security and logging capacities.
3. Apache can handle applications in other languages,
If you look back through the list archives I think you'll find this topic
has been beaten to death several times.
-Original Message-
From: Timothy Fisher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 2:03 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Tomcat vs. Apache/Tomcat
Can
Hello,
For one data point, I am on a project using Tomcat4-b7 (haven't admitted
latest Tomcat into project yet) and seeing pretty good performance.
Under a constant load from 3 machines running an automated abuse test
against a dual PIII-733, tomcat delivered 140page/sec avg. for about
a million
Hello,
I've just been reading about the new I/O api in Java 1.4. If it is as good as it
looks, Tomcat wont need Apache at all in the near future. Tomcat should be able to
deliver static pages efficiently enough on its own. Very exciting. Can't wait for
the Java 1.4 version of Tomcat.
al" systems.
Salu2. Jose.
- Original Message -
From: Chandramohan P [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2001 7:05 PM
Subject: RE: TOMCAT vs Apache
Hi Jose, Thanks a lot for the prompt reply..but could u elaborate a little
further!
Thanks,
Chandra
Hi Sandra.
You could use Tomcat as a standalone server, but Apache is better serving
simple html pages. This is why it's recommended to use both Apache and
Tomcat.
Jose.
- Original Message -
From: Chandramohan P [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2001 6:08
1)Tomcat is not robust
2)"horses for courses", Let tomcat do, what it is good in - "Serving
servlets/JSP pages and apache serve static pages.
for more details try and read the FAQ at http://apache.org
ramesh
_
Get Your
35 matches
Mail list logo
