mod_proxy_http is almost always slower than a properly configured mod_jk (due to the lack of persistant connections). The work is to get a 'properly configured mod_jk' ;-).
Personally, I like mod_proxy_ajp, just for the integrated configuration options. The speed should be comperable to mod_jk, but I confess that I haven't actually run benchmarks on it. As always, the only benchmark that counts it the one that you run :). This sort of thing depends on what your app really does, as well as the static/dynamic content ratio. And, except in very few cases, you will get the best speed with a Tomcat stand-alone. "Laurent Perez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Hello One of our production servers recently started to suffer from very heavy performance troubles under load : the current setup is apache2 + mod_jk/ajp13 + tomcat5.0.25, jdk 1.4.2, 1GB (Xmx/Xms to 640MB) on a dual 2.4Ghz Xeon server. The maximum amount of requests/sec reached is around 15req/sec under production load, and I'd like to hit something between 30 and 40req/sec, unfortunately, mod_cache is not really an option for our current hosting company. Are there available benchmarks comparing mod_jk and mod_proxy available, or resulting from anyone's personal experience ? I googled quite a bit and results are just random, someone will tell jk is faster, someone else will tell proxy is faster, so I'm looking for some advice on this TC list. Thanks for any input Laurent -- <a href="http://in-pocket.blogspot.com";>http://in-pocket.blogspot.com - Mobile world, technology and more</a> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
