Remy Maucherat wrote:
I think very few people are actually using mod_proxy instead of mod_jk. You've got to back your assertion with some kind of numbers, otherwise it's FUD.
As do you. The assertion was based on comments on this mailing list, but we've already established that there is a need for the ajp protocol, lets move on.
I disagree with your statements. Performance is first, as long as useability isn't too bad.
Then we must agree to disagree. In my experience, if something isn't usable, it doesn't get used, so any potential performance advantage is purely theoretical. Lack of usability is one of the biggest failures in many open source projects, and I don't want to see httpd fall into that trap.
To give an example, a mod_jk 1.2.x fully rewritten with APR, compiled with Apache, and with better configuration would clearly be useable enough (I think mod_jk 1.2 was actually good enough on many Unix platforms).
It would be different to the established configuration method for backend servers, thus causing comments like "why does ajp work differently to the rest of the server", and "why is the load balancing feature of ajp not available server wide?".
I'm sure Mladen, Henri and Bill will look thoroughly at mod_proxy, and will try their best to use it, but you really need to relax your position from "-1 for your code if it doesn't use mod_proxy". You need to add "unless we find good reasons why it wouldn't work for us".
httpd exists for the use of end users, not for the private use of just the people you listed. If somebody is going to the effort of creating a module specifically for httpd v2.0, then I don't see why they wouldn't go to the effort of making it fit into the established framework properly.
I think _you_ need to do some research into mod_proxy, how it is designed and exactly how it works before making statements about it's performance. By testing the mod_proxy_http module, and then making statements about mod_proxy (a totally different module) shows that you don't know how the proxy framework works.
Regards, Graham --
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
