More mature but less tested !
-
Henri Gomez ___[_]____
EMAIL : [EMAIL PROTECTED] (. .)
PGP KEY : 697ECEDD ...oOOo..(_)..oOOo...
PGP Fingerprint : 9DF8 1EA8 ED53 2F39 DC9B 904A 364F 80E6
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Jeff Kilbride [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2001 11:26 PM
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: apj12 or apj13 on 3.2.2?
>
>
>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
>> >>
>> >
>>
>
