Then why not move the 3.3 mod_jk code into 3.2.x, if it's more mature?
Thanks,
--jeff
----- Original Message -----
From: "GOMEZ Henri" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2001 1:33 PM
Subject: RE: apj12 or apj13 on 3.2.2?
> >From what I've gathered off this list and the dev list, ajp13
> >maintains open
> >socket connections with Apache and reuses them, instead of closing them
> >after each request like ajp12. So, ajp13 was designed to be
> >faster and more
> >scaleable. However, if you use ajp13, any time you restart
> >Tomcat you must
> >restart Apache, too.
>
> >I've also heard that the ajp13 code in the 3.3 milestone
> >releases is more
> >mature than the ajp13 code in the 3.2.x tree. Since the 3.3 mod_jk is
> >compatible with 3.2.x, I'll probably give that a try. I
> >believe the 3.2.x
> >mod_jk has several *issues* that probably won't be cleaned up
> >until the 3.3
> >release.
>
> The features in 3.3 mod_jk are not dependant on Tomcat 3.3.
> It's only native code !
>
> >Thanks,
> >--jeff
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Hunter Hillegas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >To: "Tomcat User List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2001 11:07 AM
> >Subject: apj12 or apj13 on 3.2.2?
> >
> >
> >> With 3.2.1 I couldn't use apj12 because I needed to do file uploads
> >through
> >> Apache and it just didn't work. I see that bug has been
> >fixed in 3.2.2.
> >>
> >> I'm wondering if under 3.2.2, which protocol is
> >faster/scales better for a
> >> popular site?
> >>
> >> Any input is appreciated.
> >>
> >> Hunter
> >>
> >
>
