Hi, I have no data to show, but since I use all three tools, I can give you my two cents :)
Varnish + Tomcat is definitely the simplest architecture, because it does not involve AJP. I would also consider changing the default (blocking) http connector on the Tomcat side and measuring performance improvements (non blocking, native...). I'm also a big fan of the VCL which feels a lot more natural than httpd's configuration to me. As I trust Varnish not to be the bottleneck, I am not keen on adding a new indirection (httpd) for a binary protocol that is not relevant to me anymore. I believe (still no data) having a 10Gb/s connection between Varnish and Tomcat (I assume they're not sitting too far from each other) outperforms the compactness of AJP (serialization involved). Best Regards, Dridi On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 10:54 AM, Adrian Ber <[email protected]> wrote: > Does anyone have some comparison data in terms of performance for using in > front of Tomcat either Varnish or Apache with mod_jk. I know that AJ > connector suppose to be faster than HTTP, but I was thinking that in > combination Varnish which is lighter and highly optimized could perform > better. There is also the discussion between static resources (which I think > will perform faster with Varnish than Apache, even with mod_cache) and > dynamic pages. > I asked this question on ServerFault too > http://serverfault.com/questions/545793/varnish-tomcat-vs-apache-mod-jk-tomcat > Which configuration would be advisable Varnish + Tomcat or Apache + > mod_cache + mod_jk +Tomcat? > > Thanks, > Adrian Ber. > > > _______________________________________________ > varnish-misc mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc _______________________________________________ varnish-misc mailing list [email protected] https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc
