Phillip Qin wrote:
Will you suggest that we can now start switching jk2 to either mod_proxy or
mod_jk? I really hate jk because it is difficult to configure (am I the
first one to say that?) compared to jk2. I am kinda guy that would like to
deal with the enemy I know, in this case - jk2.
Well yes, I would suggest a switch.
Of course if the jk2 works well for you there is no need to
switch anyhow :).
Also there has been some patches applied to jk2 from the last release,
but you'll have to use cvs snapshot to build it, cause we'll make
no furter releases.
For apache2.1 there is no need to use mod_jk or mod_jk2.
You have mod_proxy, mod_proxy_ajp and mod_proxy_balancer,
together with integrated caching using mod_cache.
It works around 10% faster then jk or jk2 (with caching
turned on for static content as twice as faster).
MT.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
