There are many, many, many reasons why you would want to use Apache in addition to Tomcat. Serving static content is just one of them.
Some other reasons include: - you don't want to run Tomcat as root (it has to run as root to run on port 80) - you need CGI - you need SSI - you need any one of Apache's other modules, like mod_rewrite or anything else - you have a customized Apache for whatever reason - you have a bunch of virtual hosts, with only some of them using Tomcat - lots more John > -----Original Message----- > From: Jan Agermose [mailto:jan@;agermose.dk] > Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 9:50 AM > To: 'Tomcat Users tomcat > Subject: apache/tomcat performance > > > I guess the reason to have apache in front of tomcat is that > apache serves html and images faster than tomcat? But what is > the perfomance cost of having apache commmunicate with tomcat > using JK? Has anyone ever testet this? I would think that > most browsers cache html and images and therefor the > perfomance gain from apache should matter less than the > potential performance lose from jsp/servlet pages that are > never cached? > > Jan Agermose > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:tomcat-user-unsubscribe@;jakarta.apache.org> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:tomcat-user-help@;jakarta.apache.org>
