Here is a benchmark test. I don't know if it is generally reliable, but it fits with experience I have had where they match up.
http://www.chamas.com/bench/index.html At 05:07 PM 9/7/2002 -0700, you wrote: >Yeah, you're right ... no one was refuting that. If anything, several >people said the same thing you did. I guess I just don't understand why or >to what extent that's true. I'll look into it some more and let you know >anything I find. > > >:) > >Neal > > >-----Original Message----- >From: micael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: Saturday, September 07, 2002 4:53 PM >To: Tomcat Users List >Subject: RE: Tomcat standalone Versus Apache > > >I did the comparison about a year ago, and things change. I have no heard >of a change in this regard. That would be a huge, unprecedented change for >Tomcat, and I have been following Tomcat daily. I notice that no one >disputed the suggestions I made, so I assume the tests are still at least >roughly valid. The issue is thousands versus hundreds, neal. > >There are lots of benchmark studies. Just look around. It is not close, >neal. If you find something different, I would be really interested. > >Maybe your source meant that Tomcat and like servers can serve jsp almost >like html. That is not saying that Tomcat can serve jsp like Apache can >serve html. > >I cannot think of a good reason to have Tomcat serve html off hand. > >You can cache anything. The question is whether there is an efficient way >to make that useful to do. Why do it when Apache is there? > >Do you have some reason why you don't want to use Apache? > >I hope, again, that this is not offensive. Not meant to be. > >Micael > >At 03:22 PM 9/7/2002 -0700, you wrote: > >By static content, you mean HTML files probably, right? > > > >I read recently that thanks to the recently advanced JIT compilers that a > >typical JSP can be served nearly s quickly as a standard HTML file. That > >said, should Apache serving HTML really be "way, way, way faster" than > >Tomcat sreving JSPs? And why/how might this be different than Tomcat > >serving HTML? > > > >Perhaps this (that JSPs are almost as fast as HTML now) was said in general > >but doesn't apply to all app servers? > > > >Do you know of any benchmarks on this or can anyone quantify just how much > >faster Apache is or shed some light on why? > > > >Oh and btw, does anyone know if its possible to cache page output via > >Tomcat? This also might increase performance on static content. Perhaps > >this affects that Tomcat/Apache performance gap? > > > >Thanks > >Neal > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: micael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > >Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 10:51 PM > >To: Tomcat Users List > >Subject: RE: Tomcat standalone Versus Apache > > > > > >Depends on if you have static content, neal. Apache is way, way, way > >faster, of course, if you have static content running. > > > >At 05:25 PM 9/6/2002 -0700, you wrote: > > >Alright, > > > > > >So there's no taboo here that I'm not aware of. It sounds like a lot of > > >people do run Tomcat with Apache but not all and its simply a matter of > >what > > >fits my needs best. So, there are no silver bullet issues (other than > > >posibly this roon daemon thing) which suggests running Tomcat standalone >in > > >production is foolish, right? > > > > > >Thanks. > > >Neal > > > > > > > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > > >From: Randy Secrist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > >Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 2:44 PM > > >To: Tomcat Users List > > >Subject: Re: Tomcat standalone Versus Apache > > > > > > > > >I have heard reports, (although never seen actual numbers or data) that > > >suggest that if you have a lot of static pages for a large site, >standalone > > >Tomcat decreases in performace pretty quickly. That said - Apache has >also > > >been tested and proven with static pages, and has a great system for >adding > > >extentions. As such, many production environments run cgi, php, and >other > > >scripting languages for their web pages. Apache's role as a fully > > >serviceable http server is much more broad than the http services Tomcat > > >connectors provide. Tomcat connectors CAN interface with Apache to give > >jsp > > >/ servlet container abilities to Apache. > > > > > >Usually, people run Apache + Tomcat so they can use multiple scripting > > >languages - since the entire world doesn't use java. While Tomcat does > > >support cgi (via servlet calls), jsp / servlet containers were not >designed > > >with this explicitly designed as their main role - while Apache was. I > >have > > >also never heard of a servlet that imitates php...although someone who > >never > > >sleeps at night has probably implemented it. > > > > > >Randy > > > > > >----- Original Message ----- > > >From: "neal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >To: "Tomcat Users List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 3:24 PM > > >Subject: Tomcat standalone Versus Apache > > > > > > > > > > What do most people run for production and why? Tomcat standalone or > > >Tomcat > > > > with Apache? And for that matter, isn't the http server for Tomcat > > >Apache - > > > > or is it something else? > > > > > > > > John Turner mentioned the possible concern with running Tomcat as >root. > > >Are > > > > there any other concerns? Performance? Security? > > > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > Neal > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > > ><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: > > ><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > > > > > > >-- > > >To unsubscribe, e-mail: > > ><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >For additional commands, e-mail: > > ><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > > >-- > > >To unsubscribe, e-mail: > ><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >For additional commands, e-mail: > ><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > >-- > >To unsubscribe, e-mail: > ><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >For additional commands, e-mail: > ><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > >-- > >To unsubscribe, e-mail: ><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >For additional commands, e-mail: ><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > >-- >To unsubscribe, e-mail: ><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >For additional commands, e-mail: ><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >-- >To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
