On 3/18/06, Nikola Milutinovic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
3. If you would like to do some load balancing (how does TC standalone stand
here?).
No problems with standalone tomcat. Really nice :-)
Nix.
Leon
-
To
Hi,
My server is a bit 'slow'. It takes me a while to receive my pages
when I hit the site.
How fast is tomcat when using apache + mod_jk?
Is there any performance test I can apply on my server to check if it
is tomcat or my badwidth?
Thank you
Vanessa Campos
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ICQ 35381281
If you have lots of static html pages then apache is much better at
handling them. For other dynamic content like .jsp tomcat has to handle
the requests. So thats why you would have apache + the mod_jk connector.
If all your files are jsp and you don't need static page serving or other
features of
that has two CPU's run faster or it wouldn't make any
diffrence?
do you know of any tests done for clusters
From: Alex Jalali [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: TomCat + mod_jk performance
If you have lots of static html pages then apache is much better at
handling them.
Have you actually
There are lots of reasons to run Apache in front of
Tomcat, and lots of reasons not to.
This just depends on your use cases and web site.
At any rate, here's one way to find out in your case
if the Apache -- ajp13 -- Tomcat process is your
bottleneck.
1. Get jmeter at
On 3/17/06, Alex Jalali [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Although i do have this question about non-static pages. Which do you
think is faster? let say you have 1GB ram and 2 CPUs. running a) apache +
1 tomcat or b) apache + 2 tomcat in cluster via mod_jk? would having 2 JVM
on the same server that
