-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Robert,
Robert Koberg wrote: > On Oct 15, 2008, at 5:44 PM, Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote: > >> use mod_proxy_http or mod_jk, > > I have seen a few posts recommending mod_proxy_http a little bit over > mod_jk. Why is that? Note that mod_jk and mod_proxy_ajp fill the same role: they use the AJP protocol to connect Apache httpd to Tomcat (or any AJP-compliant application server). mod_proxy_http does the same thing, but uses the HTTP protocol, and so has a few options missing (not exactly sure what they are). I chose mod_jk over mod_proxy_ajp for two reasons: 1. mod_jk has been around for years, and it was the only game in town when I got started. 2. I find that mod_jk is more configurable for complex deployments. I tried to switch to mod_proxy_ajp when we moved to Apache httpd 2.2.x, but I had a hard time getting it to do what I wanted it to do, so I stuck with mod_jk. Filip didn't explain his recommendation, but I believe Filip was suggesting that mod_proxy_http was more robust than mod_proxy_ajp and might not have the same problems. From my experience, mod_jk is very robust and reliable. Hope that helps, - -chris -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkj4+ioACgkQ9CaO5/Lv0PAoyQCeL4He8BdVowbB90N9DnaAcvvq EqsAn2a6PPwlYuxgwLqEbSVdyHR8rk8i =CZZV -----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]
