Re: [AJP] proxy status

2004-08-12 Thread William A. Rowe, Jr.
At 11:19 AM 8/12/2004, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: >--On Thursday, August 12, 2004 12:57 AM -0500 "William A. Rowe, Jr." <[EMAIL >PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>Although he's subscribed to all three lists, I'd ask that they go either >>to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] The history of the discussions

Re: [AJP] proxy status

2004-08-11 Thread William A. Rowe, Jr.
At 11:18 PM 8/11/2004, Costin Manolache wrote: >William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: >> >>>It would be great if we would have at least one or 2 people who are committers in >>>both projects. Since we can't propose Mladen in apache, maybe we can convince >>>Graham to join tomcat :-) >> >>Can't propose mtur

Re: [AJP] proxy status

2004-08-11 Thread Costin Manolache
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: At 02:15 PM 8/7/2004, Costin wrote: Now let's see how to get this in Apache2.0... Gonna try to make that happen, if I can somehow merge history (ick) It would be great if we would have at least one or 2 people who are committers in both projects. Since we can't propose

Re: [AJP] proxy status

2004-08-11 Thread William A. Rowe, Jr.
At 02:15 PM 8/7/2004, Costin wrote: >Now let's see how to get this in Apache2.0... Gonna try to make that happen, if I can somehow merge history (ick) >It would be great if we would have at least one or 2 people who are committers in >both projects. Since we can't propose Mladen in apache, maybe

Re: [AJP] proxy status

2004-08-07 Thread Costin Manolache
Excelent ! Now let's see how to get this in Apache2.0... It would be great if we would have at least one or 2 people who are committers in both projects. Since we can't propose Mladen in apache, maybe we can convince Graham to join tomcat :-) Costin Mladen Turk wrote: Standard: Apache2.0.50/

RE: [AJP] proxy status

2004-08-06 Thread Mladen Turk
> > Standard: > Apache2.0.50/proxy_http 276 req/sec > > New implementain (DEBUG compile): > Apache2.0.50/proxy_http 329 req/sec > > Apache2.0.50/proxy_ajp 750 req/sec Apache2.0.50/mod_jk 730 req/sec So, we are slihtly faster :) MT. smime.p7s Description:

RE: [AJP] proxy status

2004-08-06 Thread Mladen Turk
Remy Maucherat wrote: > >Yes, only the single DNS per worker(connection pool) query is used > >(unless entire worker is recycled). > > > > > So the DNS lookup happens once, right ? Good. > And... Standard: Apache2.0.50/proxy_http 276 req/sec New implementain (DEBUG compile): Apache2.0.50/

Re: [AJP] proxy status

2004-08-06 Thread Remy Maucherat
Mladen Turk wrote: No the request is still 1.0 and proxy_http checks r->proto_num < HTTP_VERSION(1,1). Requested standard servlet/HelloWorldExample.ยจ Ok. You can hack a little ab.c to have it generate a HTTP/1.1 request ;) Obviously HTTP/1.0 is not favorable for proxying, so I think HTTP/1.1 wo

Re: [AJP] proxy status

2004-08-06 Thread jean-frederic clere
Mladen Turk wrote: Hi all, I've finished the connection pool for mod_proxy. The proxy_http now uses the connection pool (cca 10% speedup for HTTP1.0, the 1.1 should be even higher, but the ab doesn't support 1.1). If someone is willing to test and chase the bugs, he's more then welcome :). I have "

RE: [AJP] proxy status

2004-08-06 Thread Mladen Turk
Graham Leggett wrote: > > Cool bananas! Possible stupid question: how do I get hold of > this code? > (Which repository is it in?) > http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/jakarta-tomcat-connectors/ajp/proxy/ Works both on 2.1 and 2.0. > > TODO: > > 1. Porting the mechanism from http to proxy_

Re: [AJP] proxy status

2004-08-06 Thread Graham Leggett
Mladen Turk wrote: I've finished the connection pool for mod_proxy. The proxy_http now uses the connection pool (cca 10% speedup for HTTP1.0, the 1.1 should be even higher, but the ab doesn't support 1.1). If someone is willing to test and chase the bugs, he's more then welcome :). Cool bananas! Po

RE: [AJP] proxy status

2004-08-06 Thread Mladen Turk
Remy Maucherat wrote: > > > >I've finished the connection pool for mod_proxy. > >The proxy_http now uses the connection pool (cca 10% speedup for > >HTTP1.0, the 1.1 should be even higher, but the ab doesn't > support 1.1). > > > > > You should probably test with "-k" = HTTP/1.0 with keepali

Re: [AJP] proxy status

2004-08-06 Thread Remy Maucherat
Mladen Turk wrote: Hi all, I've finished the connection pool for mod_proxy. The proxy_http now uses the connection pool (cca 10% speedup for HTTP1.0, the 1.1 should be even higher, but the ab doesn't support 1.1). You should probably test with "-k" = HTTP/1.0 with keepalive, and request somethi

[AJP] proxy status

2004-08-06 Thread Mladen Turk
Hi all, I've finished the connection pool for mod_proxy. The proxy_http now uses the connection pool (cca 10% speedup for HTTP1.0, the 1.1 should be even higher, but the ab doesn't support 1.1). If someone is willing to test and chase the bugs, he's more then welcome :). TODO: 1. Porting the mech