You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@tomcat.apache.org by Marko Asplund <ma...@ixonos.com> on 2012/11/04 16:12:38 UTC
Re: Apache httpd reverse proxy setup
On 31/10/2012 20:08:21 GMT, Mark Thomas wrote:
> http://www.tomcatexpert.com/blog/2010/06/16/deciding-between-modjk-modproxyhttp-and-modproxyajp
>
> The mod_proxy_ajp stability issues are less of an issue now than they
> were when I wrote that article. What that means is if you want the SSL
> benefits of AJP with the mod_proxy_xxx benefits of consistent
> configuration then mod_proxy_ajp is the way to go.
very good post, thanks for the pointer!
Are there any noticeable differences performance wise?
I found this performance comparison that was done on Windows:
http://www.blakerobertson.com/devlog/2012/2/7/performance-comparison-mod_jk-vs-mod_proxy_ajp-for-apache-22.html
The exact performance test methodology is not described but do you
think any conclusions can be drawn on the relative performance figures
for the general case and other platforms? I'm especially interested
about Linux (RHEL 5 and 6 + clones).
marko
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tomcat.apache.org
Re: Apache httpd reverse proxy setup
Posted by Christopher Schultz <ch...@christopherschultz.net>.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Marko,
On 11/4/12 10:12 AM, Marko Asplund wrote:
> On 31/10/2012 20:08:21 GMT, Mark Thomas wrote:
>
>> http://www.tomcatexpert.com/blog/2010/06/16/deciding-between-modjk-modproxyhttp-and-modproxyajp
>>
>>
>>
The mod_proxy_ajp stability issues are less of an issue now than they
>> were when I wrote that article. What that means is if you want
>> the SSL benefits of AJP with the mod_proxy_xxx benefits of
>> consistent configuration then mod_proxy_ajp is the way to go.
>
> very good post, thanks for the pointer!
>
> Are there any noticeable differences performance wise? I found this
> performance comparison that was done on Windows:
> http://www.blakerobertson.com/devlog/2012/2/7/performance-comparison-mod_jk-vs-mod_proxy_ajp-for-apache-22.html
>
> The exact performance test methodology is not described but do
> you think any conclusions can be drawn on the relative performance
> figures for the general case and other platforms? I'm especially
> interested about Linux (RHEL 5 and 6 + clones).
It's tough to decide what would be best for you based upon someone
else's vague methodology and your vague requirements :)
I would recommend doing your own performance testing in your own
environment: it doesn't take much to fire-up JMeter or ApacheBench to
test these configurations.
One thing that the author of that comparison did was use
ProxyPassMatch which uses a regular expression to match the URL.
JkMount does not use a regular expression and so that may have had an
effect -- the comparison doesn't say what kind of requests were being
served. If this was a test of static content (which is really all you
need to test the connector), then regular-expression overhead might
have made a big difference.
When doing your own performance testing, I highly recommend that you
try to compare configurations that are as similar as possible to each
other. Otherwise, you are lying to yourself ;)
- -chris
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.17 (Darwin)
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://www.enigmail.net/
iEYEARECAAYFAlCYkhUACgkQ9CaO5/Lv0PBzFgCgqQ92kfrbBKNbdB/lMhCfK/eq
GT0AniMP8/snxQJKikb5CZNQDOIcfiJu
=Z1uV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tomcat.apache.org