Confusing - Compression 5.0.16 - Filter or connector???

[Ron Andersen <ra...@yahoo.com>]

I am only using one platform and I need the best performance, since I will be compressing images. Therefore, if I use the connector compression, shall I turn the filter compression off(in web.xml). Also, does the connector(in server.xml) support the following attributes??
 
compression="on" 
   compressionMinSize="2048" 
   noCompressionUserAgents="gozilla, traviata" 
   compressableMimeType="text/html,text/xml"


Remy Maucherat <re...@jboss.org> wrote:
Shapira, Yoav wrote:
> Howdy,
> Yup, it would be attempted twice (if the request matches both the filter
> and the connector, which is the default setup). Personally I prefer the
> filter, as it's more portable and not tomcat-specific.

I prefer the connector, since it's faster and more powerful (you get the 
regexp based exception list Henri added, etc) :)
If we (ever) get a gz impl that isn't an output stream and could work on 
"straight" byte arrays, we'd also be able to do the compression without 
facade objects at all, which would have the best performance.

-- 
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
R�my Maucherat
Senior Developer & Consultant
JBoss Group (Europe) S�RL
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tomcat-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tomcat-user-help@jakarta.apache.org


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard

Re: Confusing - Compression 5.0.16 - Filter or connector???

[Erik Wright <er...@spectacle.ca>]

You will be compressing images?! :(

Remember that most image formats - gif, jpeg, png, etc, are already 
compressed. In most cases compressing them again will only gain you 2-3% 
improvement if anything at all. So you will be spending time compressing 
for nothing.

Notice that the "compressableMimeType" attribute that you copied below 
does not include "image/jpeg". That is because whoever configured this 
example file rightly excluded compression of objects that would not 
benefit at all.

If you are expecting compression to make up for a web site that is 
graphic heavy, you will be sorely disappointed. If, however, you have a 
website with significant amounts of text (i.e., large database result 
sets) then you will probably benefit.

-Erik

Ron Andersen wrote:

>I am only using one platform and I need the best performance, since I will be compressing images. Therefore, if I use the connector compression, shall I turn the filter compression off(in web.xml). Also, does the connector(in server.xml) support the following attributes??
> 
>compression="on" 
>   compressionMinSize="2048" 
>   noCompressionUserAgents="gozilla, traviata" 
>   compressableMimeType="text/html,text/xml"
>
>
>Remy Maucherat <re...@jboss.org> wrote:
>Shapira, Yoav wrote:
>  
>
>>Howdy,
>>Yup, it would be attempted twice (if the request matches both the filter
>>and the connector, which is the default setup). Personally I prefer the
>>filter, as it's more portable and not tomcat-specific.
>>    
>>
>
>I prefer the connector, since it's faster and more powerful (you get the 
>regexp based exception list Henri added, etc) :)
>If we (ever) get a gz impl that isn't an output stream and could work on 
>"straight" byte arrays, we'd also be able to do the compression without 
>facade objects at all, which would have the best performance.
>
>  
>


-- 
http://www.spectacle.ca/
The Online Source for Live Music in Montreal
.::514.286.1699::.