Actually, on inspecting the documentation of Apache 1.3, you are correct (please ignore my last email).
"This module implements a proxy/cache for Apache. It implements proxying capability for FTP, CONNECT (for SSL), HTTP/0.9, HTTP/1.0, and (as of Apache 1.3.23) HTTP/1.1. The module can be configured to connect to other proxy modules for these and other protocols. This module was experimental in Apache 1.1.x. As of Apache 1.2, mod_proxy stability is greatly improved. Warning: Do not enable proxying with ProxyRequests until you have secured your server. Open proxy servers are dangerous both to your network and to the Internet at large." Tom Veldhouse ----- Original Message ----- From: "Larry Sanderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Greg Wilkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 9:54 AM Subject: Re: [JBoss-user] Apache 1.3 and JBOSS 3.0.2 (w/tomcat or w/jetty) > mod_proxy definitely supports HTTP/1.1 (see > http://httpd.apache.org/docs-2.0/mod/mod_proxy.html). Does this imply that > it also supports keep-alives? > > Also, with mod_rewrite, we have configured apache to serve up static content > even within password-protected portions of the web-app. With mod_jk, it > always does authentication checks. I'm not sure how much performance that > buys us, but it is something. > > Another config that may affect these numbers: the default apache ssl config > includes the following: > SetEnvIf User-Agent ".*MSIE.*" \ > nokeepalive ssl-unclean-shutdown \ > downgrade-1.0 force-response-1.0 > > This forces all access from MS IE via https to downgrade to http/1.0. I > have played around with this, and sure enough, without this, IE periodically > shows blank pages while browsing secure pages. This configuration was in > place for both mod_jk and mod_proxy tests. > > Regardless, the numbers we have obtained speak very clearly to us. Please > respond if you find that your benchmarks show something else - I would love > to make my site go faster! > > In the words of Mr. Schaefer: Have Fun! > > -Larry > > > I think that benchmarking that shows mod_proxy as faster than mod_jk > > is highly suspect. > > > > While mod_jk does faff about a lot - changing strings into single > > bytes and then back again, mod_proxy does not use persistent connectons > and must > > reestablish a TCP/IP connection for each request. > > > > I would only expect mod_proxy to be faster if the load presented was > > HTTP/1.0 or not kept-alive HTTP/1.1 > > > > If mod_proxy does now support HTTP/1.1 persistent connections, then that > > is very good news as it is a much better way to forward requests (use the > > protocol rather than invent a new one!). > > > > cheers > > > > > > > > > > Larry Sanderson wrote: > > > These are consistant with our results. We use mod_proxy and mod_rewrite > in > > > production becaus it has given us a consistent performance edge over the > > > alternatives (mod_jk, no apache, etc...). Unfortunaty, last I checked, > Tux > > > does not support ssl, so that was not an option for us. > > > > > > -Larry > > > > > > > > >>As of Apache 1.3.23 I think, Apache supports HTTP/1.1 compliance in it's > > >>mod_proxy mechanism, meaning it can take advantage of persistent > > >>connections. That goes for the 2.x series of Apache as well. > > >> > > >>Using Apache 1.3.26, JBoss 2.4.4 and several different JSP/Servlet > engines > > >>(Tomcat 3.2.4, Jetty 3.0,3.1, and Resin 2.0.5) I performed many load > tests > > >>using LoadRunner against the above configurations. However, for each > > >>scenario, I tested once using mod_jk w/ ajp13 connector and a second > time > > >>using mod_rewrite and mod_proxy passing off to the http listener of > > > > > > whatever > > > > > >>jsp/servlet engine that was running. In _every_ example, the use of > > >>mod_rewrite and mod_proxy together improved performance over using > > >>mod_jk/ajp13. And this is in an application that uses Struts heavily. I > > > > > > am > > > > > >>currently setting up a configuration with Tomcat 4.0.3 so I can try > > > > > > testing > > > > > >>with mod_webapp and see how it performs. > > >> > > >>I then found even better performance on Linux, by using the TUX kernel > web > > >>server in place of Apache and passing on all non-static requests on to > the > > >>specific jsp/servlet container being used at the time. > > >> > > >>As a result, I would have to say that my testing reveals that using the > > >>latest Apaches with mod_proxy will out perform the mod_jk scenarios. > > >> > > >>Thanks, > > >>Mike > > >> > > >>----- Original Message ----- > > >>From: "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >>Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >>Subject: Re: [JBoss-user] Apache 1.3 and JBOSS 3.0.2 (w/tomcat or > w/jetty) > > >>Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2002 22:48:32 -0500 > > >>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >> > > >>This link points to an area that really applies to Apache2 and mod_jk2 > (or > > >>proxy which has disadvantages). I was under the impression it (Jetty) > > > > > > would > > > > > >>work with mod_jk and Apache 1.3. > > >> > > >>J. Michael Savage > > >>Datastream Development > > >> > > >><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >>(800) 955-6775 x7646 > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >>------------------------------------------------------- > > >>This sf.net email is sponsored by: OSDN - Tired of that same old > > >>cell phone? Get a new here for FREE! > > >>https://www.inphonic.com/r.asp?r=sourceforge1&refcode1=vs3390 > > >>_______________________________________________ > > >>JBoss-user mailing list > > >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-user > > >> > > > > > > > > > -- > > Greg Wilkins<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Phone/fax: +44 7092063462 > > Mort Bay Consulting Australia and UK. http://www.mortbay.com > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This sf.net email is sponsored by: OSDN - Tired of that same old > cell phone? Get a new here for FREE! > https://www.inphonic.com/r.asp?r=sourceforge1&refcode1=vs3390 > _______________________________________________ > JBoss-user mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-user > ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by: OSDN - Tired of that same old cell phone? Get a new here for FREE! https://www.inphonic.com/r.asp?r=sourceforge1&refcode1=vs3390 _______________________________________________ JBoss-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-user
