You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@tomcat.apache.org by johnrock <jo...@yahoo.com> on 2009/05/29 21:57:56 UTC
Apache Portable Runtime ?
I am running a standalone tomcat 6.0.18 on a centOS 5.3 system. Is it a good
idea to install the Apache Portable Runtime? Would I see performance
increase? And, are there any drawbacks/cons to doing so?
Thanks for any advice you might have on this -
John
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Apache-Portable-Runtime---tp23786125p23786125.html
Sent from the Tomcat - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tomcat.apache.org
Re: Apache Portable Runtime ?
Posted by Bill Barker <wb...@wilshire.com>.
"Caldarale, Charles R" <Ch...@unisys.com> wrote in message
news:0AAE5AB84B013E45A7B61CB66943C17228F179595F@USEA-EXCH7.na.uis.unisys.com...
>> From: johnrock [mailto:johnpiser@yahoo.com]
>> Subject: Re: Apache Portable Runtime ?
>>
>> Given that, is it still a preferred idea to install APR?
>
>Your best bet is to measure the performance of your webapp with and without
>APR. Since you're not using SSL and >have limited static content, I
>suspect you won't see much of a difference.
>
I agree with Chuck. The performance of APR against the other connectors
varies a lot depending on the OS (e.g. last time I saw numbers, which was a
while ago, APR for dynamic content was slower on Windows). If you don't
expect to be handling a lot of concurrent connections with HTTP only than
APR doesn't offer a lot of benifits.
>> Is installing the APR considered a 'must do' for anyone
>> looking to maximize the performance of Tomcat in production?
>> Or is this something in the category of 'not neccessary/
>> adviseable unless you need it'?
>
>I'd put it in the latter category, unless you measure a noticeable
>throughput gain with it. Including APR does reduce portability, since
>you'll need a different native library for each platform, including just
>going from a 32- to 64-bit JVM.
>
>- Chuck
THIS COMMUNICATION MAY CONTAIN CONFIDENTIAL AND/OR OTHERWISE PROPRIETARY
MATERIAL and is thus for use only by the intended recipient. If you received
this in error, please contact the sender and delete the e-mail and its
attachments from all computers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tomcat.apache.org
RE: Apache Portable Runtime ?
Posted by "Caldarale, Charles R" <Ch...@unisys.com>.
> From: johnrock [mailto:johnpiser@yahoo.com]
> Subject: Re: Apache Portable Runtime ?
>
> Given that, is it still a preferred idea to install APR?
Your best bet is to measure the performance of your webapp with and without APR. Since you're not using SSL and have limited static content, I suspect you won't see much of a difference.
> Is installing the APR considered a 'must do' for anyone
> looking to maximize the performance of Tomcat in production?
> Or is this something in the category of 'not neccessary/
> adviseable unless you need it'?
I'd put it in the latter category, unless you measure a noticeable throughput gain with it. Including APR does reduce portability, since you'll need a different native library for each platform, including just going from a 32- to 64-bit JVM.
- Chuck
THIS COMMUNICATION MAY CONTAIN CONFIDENTIAL AND/OR OTHERWISE PROPRIETARY MATERIAL and is thus for use only by the intended recipient. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the e-mail and its attachments from all computers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tomcat.apache.org
Re: Apache Portable Runtime ?
Posted by Christopher Schultz <ch...@christopherschultz.net>.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
John,
On 5/29/2009 4:38 PM, johnrock wrote:
> I wanted to add a little clarity to my question: I am not using SSL or
> serving any significant amount of static content - just good ol fashioned
> Jsp/Jstl's with a standalone tomcat (no Apache). A very svelt and simple web
> app that I am designing for performance.
Aah... I read your messages out-of-order. APR will get you the biggest
performance increase with static files and sendFile="true" set on your
connector.
Still, any performance decisions made without actually doing some tests
would be silly, so go ahead and benchmark your application and see what
the difference is.
Setting up APR is pretty trivial, so it's not like it will take too much
effort to make an informed decision.
- -chris
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iEYEARECAAYFAkogqqMACgkQ9CaO5/Lv0PAPPQCgwQPSbfPh2JljNRTkCG86hMNm
+QYAnAonTQ4XbdhmGxFFo0SPV9QLfWVq
=iDmt
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tomcat.apache.org
Re: Apache Portable Runtime ?
Posted by johnrock <jo...@yahoo.com>.
I wanted to add a little clarity to my question: I am not using SSL or
serving any significant amount of static content - just good ol fashioned
Jsp/Jstl's with a standalone tomcat (no Apache). A very svelt and simple web
app that I am designing for performance.
Given that, is it still a preferred idea to install APR? Is installing the
APR considered a 'must do' for anyone looking to maximize the performance of
Tomcat in production? Or is this something in the category of 'not
neccessary/adviseable unless you need it'?
Thanks
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Apache-Portable-Runtime---tp23786125p23786703.html
Sent from the Tomcat - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tomcat.apache.org