-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
?! Now I am confused ?!
10,000 connections and 10,000 virtual hosts have NOTHING to do with
one another.
As to 10,000 virtual hosts in Tomcat, vs 10,000 virtual hosts in
Apache....
No idea - I don't think 10,000 virtual hosts on either is a good idea.
But with Tomcat, you have 10,000 'WebApps' ie: at least 10,000
objects, ignoring what ever else the webapp initialises, vs a look up
table (probably a hash) in Apache.
I don't think it is a very scalable solution.
According to the original poster, all 10,000 webapps, are the same,
so I would look at only having 1 web app, and dealing with the
'virtual hosting' inside my webapp.
Andrew
On 26/08/2006, at 12:47 PM, Mladen Turk wrote:
Andrew Miehs wrote:
Are we referring to 10,000 Virtual servers or 10,000 Connections?
And the answer is yes to 10000 connections.
It does not matter. 10000 Virtual hosts in Apache
would require as much memory as 10000 Hosts in Tomcat.
Once when you break the JVM latency, there is no much
difference between Java or any other 'optimized' program.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Darwin)
iD8DBQFE8CwcW126qUNSzvURAugcAJ45GILi2sXmzBb3ATCGClEXKv478gCfbRPT
B84NfMcmZ9ezOSm5Vi07eHw=
=f4EQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To start a new topic, e-mail: users@tomcat.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
