> I believe that the official stance is that mod_webapp will be the future
of
> Apache-tomcat connectors, and it will receive performance and feature
> improvements whereas ...
This appears to be one of the most common myths regarding Tomcat connectors.
The real official stance appears to be that mod_jk2 and mod_webapp are
competing projects from two groups of developers who don't agree with
others' code/approach.
AIUI, mod_webapp has been easier to configure; mod_jk offers load balancing,
and doesn't pass requests for static resources to Tomcat before letting
Apache handle them. mod_jk2 is getting even faster and easier to configure.
mod_webapp is getting patched to avoid passing static requests through
Tomcat first. mod_jk configuration is more similar to what those of us who
used mod_jserv know. mod_jk supports multiple worker types, including
in-process execution of Tomcat.
The biggest difference seems to be the deployment approach. When it comes
down to it, there is a difference between:
WebAppDeploy examples warpConnection /examples/
and
JkMount /*.jsp tomcat1
JkMount /examples/* tomcat1
mod_jk tells Apache about resources it should ask Tomcat to handle.
mod_webapp tells Apache about webapps that Tomcat should handle.
This really is a huge difference, if I understand the implications (without
reading through the code). For example, mod_jk won't know that we want
Tomcat to process a filter chain against a directory unless we've done a
JkMount for that tree, whereas it would know that Tomcat needs to process a
JSP page. On the other hand, mod_webapp would know about the filter chain
because the resources would have been deployed as part of a web app.
The respective developers are free to correct any of the above.
--- Noel
--
To unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Troubles with the list: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
