On Tue, Apr 23, 2002 at 07:02:38PM -0400, Anthony W. Marino wrote:
Any reason for using AJP14 over AJP13?
And what about mod_webapp?
I take it that this is mod_jk and mod_jk2? IME, mod_jk and Apache 2
don't get along well at all[1]. The impression that I've gleaned from
reading past postings
connector was faster, however I don´t have any
benchmark results to prove this.
bye Michael Delamere
- Original Message -
From: Simon Stewart [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Tomcat Users List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 11:51 AM
Subject: Re: Which Apache-To-Tomcat Connector
On Tue, Apr 23, 2002 at 07:02:38PM -0400, Anthony W. Marino wrote:
Any reason for using AJP14 over AJP13?
And what about mod_webapp?
I take it that this is mod_jk and mod_jk2? IME, mod_jk and Apache 2
don't get along well at all[1]. The impression that I've gleaned from
reading past
Users List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 11:51 AM
Subject: Re: Which Apache-To-Tomcat Connector
On Tue, Apr 23, 2002 at 07:02:38PM -0400, Anthony W. Marino wrote:
Any reason for using AJP14 over AJP13?
And what about mod_webapp?
I take it that this is mod_jk
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 08:04:17AM -0400, Anthony W. Marino wrote:
On Tue, Apr 23, 2002 at 07:02:38PM -0400, Anthony W. Marino wrote:
Any reason for using AJP14 over AJP13?
And what about mod_webapp?
I take it that this is mod_jk and mod_jk2? IME, mod_jk and Apache 2
don't get along
?
Unfortunately after visiting the jakarta site I´m none the wiser :-).
bye Michael Delamere
- Original Message -
From: Simon Stewart [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Tomcat Users List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 2:23 PM
Subject: Re: Which Apache-To-Tomcat Connector
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002
On Wednesday 24 April 2002 08:23 am, Simon Stewart wrote:
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 08:04:17AM -0400, Anthony W. Marino wrote:
On Tue, Apr 23, 2002 at 07:02:38PM -0400, Anthony W. Marino wrote:
Any reason for using AJP14 over AJP13?
And what about mod_webapp?
I take it that this
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 08:31:44AM -0400, Anthony W. Marino wrote:
On Wednesday 24 April 2002 08:23 am, Simon Stewart wrote:
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 08:04:17AM -0400, Anthony W. Marino wrote:
On Tue, Apr 23, 2002 at 07:02:38PM -0400, Anthony W. Marino wrote:
Is warp in the coyote
When you go the the coyote drop there are instructions on using it, however,
where's the Apache specific part of the instructions and module???
Anthony
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 08:04:17AM -0400, Anthony W. Marino wrote:
On Tue, Apr 23, 2002 at 07:02:38PM -0400, Anthony W. Marino wrote:
AFAIK, you have to compile that from source.
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 09:03:12AM -0400, Anthony W. Marino wrote:
When you go the the coyote drop there are instructions on using it, however,
where's the Apache specific part of the instructions and module???
Anthony
Cheers,
Simon
--
The
I've had problems compiling a mod_jk.so module. Including a failed effort of
ant native.
I'll keep plugging away until I figure it out.
Anthony
AFAIK, you have to compile that from source.
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 09:03:12AM -0400, Anthony W. Marino wrote:
When you go the the coyote drop
Apache-To-Tomcat Connector
Any reason for using AJP14 over AJP13?
And what about mod_webapp?
Thanks in advance,
Anthony
--
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Troubles with the list: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To unsubscribe
-
From: Anthony W. Marino [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 6:03 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Which Apache-To-Tomcat Connector
Any reason for using AJP14 over AJP13?
And what about mod_webapp?
Thanks in advance,
Anthony
--
Anthony W. Marino
Pres./CTO, AWM Objects
Using: Apache 2.0.35 and Tomcat 4.0.3 on Red Hat 7.2.
Say it isn't so: There is no way to serve static pages from Apache using
mod_webapp? Can anyone confirm/deny this?
Lance
The major difference between the two modules, other than this, is that
mod_jk allows static content to be served
It isn't so. You can still serve static pages, but they'll come
through Tomcat and then apache, rather than being served straight from
apache. End result: you'll see a speed hit. This is what's being
fixed, as I understand it.
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 03:00:59PM +, Lance Smith wrote:
Using:
In which version is this projected to be fixed?
-Original Message-
From: Simon Stewart [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: April 24, 2002 8:11 AM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: Which Apache-To-Tomcat Connector
It isn't so. You can still serve static pages, but they'll come
through
-
From: Simon Stewart [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: April 24, 2002 8:11 AM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: Which Apache-To-Tomcat Connector
It isn't so. You can still serve static pages, but they'll come
through Tomcat and then apache, rather than being served straight from
apache
It isn't so. You can still serve static pages, but they'll come
through Tomcat and then apache, rather than being served straight from
apache. End result: you'll see a speed hit. This is what's being
fixed, as I understand it.
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 03:00:59PM +, Lance Smith
the wiser :-).
bye Michael Delamere
- Original Message -
From: Simon Stewart [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Tomcat Users List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 2:23 PM
Subject: Re: Which Apache-To-Tomcat Connector
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 08:04:17AM -0400, Anthony W. Marino
It isn't so. There is no problem serving static content through apache
using mod webapp to server only servlets, jsp. The setup is different
than when using mod_jk, that's all.
Ken
Lance Smith wrote:
Using: Apache 2.0.35 and Tomcat 4.0.3 on Red Hat 7.2.
Say it isn't so: There is no way to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 5:37 PM
Subject: Re: Which Apache-To-Tomcat Connector
It isn't so. You can still serve static pages, but they'll come
through Tomcat and then apache, rather than being served straight from
apache. End result: you'll see a speed hit
Anthony W. Marino wrote:
Any reason for using AJP14 over AJP13?
And what about mod_webapp?
For starters, you could read http://www.ubeans.com/tomcat
One question you might want to ask yourself is wether you REALLY
need Apache forwarding requests to Tomcat. Doing so is MUCH slower
than having
On Wednesday 24 April 2002 11:54 am, Pascal Forget wrote:
Anthony W. Marino wrote:
Any reason for using AJP14 over AJP13?
And what about mod_webapp?
For starters, you could read http://www.ubeans.com/tomcat
One question you might want to ask yourself is wether you REALLY
need Apache
I just did some similar benchmarking, though I didn't test with tomcat
standalone, since I need Apache, and don't have standalone configured.
I'm sure there are other factors, O/S, JDK, etc, but here's what I
found, using mod_webapp, with Tomcat 4.04b2 on Sun JDK1.4 and Apache
1.3.22 on
With a little planning before you develop your
applications,
you can have Tomcat serve dynamic content on one IP address while Apache
serves static content on another IP address.
What connector...jk, jk2 or warp???
What are the advantages of using warp over jk/jk2 (besides loadbalancing).
I understand what you're trying to say.
Can you tell me the fundamental difference between jk and jk2.
I just read on this list that in the current release of mod_webapp there is
an additional hit in performance for static pages as well since it has to go
to TC then to Apache for static
Has anyone had success compiling the native jk connectors from
jakarta-tomcat-connectors-4.0.4b2-src on a Win2K machine?
-Original Message-
From: Simon Stewart [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 8:58 AM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: Which Apache-To-Tomcat
Any reason for using AJP14 over AJP13?
And what about mod_webapp?
Thanks in advance,
Anthony
--
To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Troubles with the list: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
with apache and over 100
requests / sec standalone.
Cavan Morris
- Original Message -
From: Anthony W. Marino [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 4:02 PM
Subject: Which Apache-To-Tomcat Connector
Any reason for using AJP14 over AJP13?
And what about
29 matches
Mail list logo