Interesing article. I've done more basic tests with tomcat 5.0.19 and jdk
1.4.2 and apache 2.0.??  apache was faster.

Maybe the problem is when I was testing static pages, it wasn't tomcat as
stand-alone vs. apache it was apache vs. tomcat + connector + apache

also I run the test locally on a windows machine. so perhaps java runs
slower on windows.

Although i do have this question about non-static pages. Which do you
think is faster? let say you have 1GB ram and 2 CPUs. running a) apache +
1 tomcat or b) apache + 2 tomcat in cluster via mod_jk? would having 2 JVM
on the same server that has two CPU's run faster or it wouldn't make any
diffrence?
do you know of any tests done for clusters






>> From: Alex Jalali [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Subject: Re: TomCat + mod_jk performance
>>
>> If you have lots of static html pages then apache is much better at
>> handling them.
>
> Have you actually measured this on the current version of Tomcat, or are
> you just echoing what you've heard?  If you try 5.5.x with the APR
> connector, I think you'll find little difference in performance between
> Tomcat and httpd for static content.
>
> This is an interesting read:
> http://tomcat.apache.org/articles/benchmark_summary.pdf
>
> (Note that the above article does not reflect the latest improvements in
> Tomcat performanc.)
>
> There are reasons to front-end Tomcat with httpd, but static content
> performance is no longer one of them.
>
>  - Chuck
>
>
> THIS COMMUNICATION MAY CONTAIN CONFIDENTIAL AND/OR OTHERWISE PROPRIETARY
> MATERIAL and is thus for use only by the intended recipient. If you
> received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the e-mail
> and its attachments from all computers.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to