"Moran Ben-David" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Chris, > > Thanks for taking the time to answer these. This information is very > useful. I'll express more thanks with further questions. > >> Nobody uses the jni worker anymore. The jni worker was intended to be an >> embedded Tomcat instance running from the mod_jk module, and is only >> supported in very old versions of Tomcat (3.3 IIRC). > > Is there any particular reason why no one is using it? It seems that > with large loads of http requests and responses the in-process > interface is ideal. > > My assumption is that the jni worker not being used anymore has > something to do with apache not having good if any multi-threaded > handling for modules at the time. However, with the advent of > apache2's MPM worker tomcat's design (multiple threads for multiple > requests) should fit like a glove. >
Yes, that is mainly why nobody has expressed an interest in porting it to TC versions higher than 3.3. It only really works on Windows. On *nix systems you end up with multiple copies of TC running (one for each copy of httpd), with no way to control session affinity. > Does this make sense? Or am I am I drawing up a neat fantasy rather > than a plausible story? > >> That's because the JNI options are not applicable to new versions. > > Is there a way to compare how tomcat would run in-process with apache2 > MPM? Do you know of any benchmarks in this direction? > You could dig up a copy of mod_jk2 and try it. I seem to remember it was relatively small. > m > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To start a new topic, e-mail: users@tomcat.apache.org > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To start a new topic, e-mail: users@tomcat.apache.org To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
