At this point, you probably know as much about both approaches as I do. mod_jk seemed more configurable, though, and my personal preference has always been to do a little more work for more flexibility. I don't know what the advantages of either are, though.
On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 5:54 AM, Kenneth P. Turvey < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, 31 Mar 2008 07:24:35 +0000, Kenneth P. Turvey wrote: > > > On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 10:37:08 -0400, Jason Warner wrote: > > > >> I think we have another option here, though. It's possible to use > >> Geronimo with the Apache server to run your application. > >> There's two ways to do this and you can find documentation for both > >> for > >> Geronimo 2.1 here [1]. Doing this, you should be able to (at least > >> with the mod_jk method) have your static content run on the HTTPd > >> server and then have geronimo handle dynamic content. Since you would > >> be using HTTP as your front end, the matter of virtual hosts would be > >> handled by the HTTP server and there is some documentation on that here > >> [2]. > > Is there some reason for using mod-jk over mod-proxy? I can't find a > list of advantages/disadvantages for either setup. > > Thanks. > > -- > Kenneth P. Turvey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > -- ~Jason Warner
