httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Henri Gomez <hgo...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Invitation to HTTPD commiters in tomcat-dev
Date Wed, 21 Jul 2004 11:52:56 GMT
Mladen Turk wrote:

>  
> 
> Graham Leggett wrote:
> 
> 
>>>I don't think that it is necessary for a mod_ajp to be 
>>
>>included inside 
>>
>>>the mod_proxy, although they are sharing some common concepts.
>>
>>I think it's very necessary - sharing those common concepts 
>>ultimately makes for doing things in a consistent way. It 
>>makes a big difference to the usability of httpd.
>>
> 
> 
> I'm sure that the 'normalization' would lead to nowhere.
>  
> 
>>Right now proxy is able to talk HTTP and FTP (and CONNECT, 
>>but it's a special case). It makes the most sense for AJP to 
>>be added to these three protocols, as there is already an 
>>established way to do this.
>>
>>Consistency is very important.
>>
>>
>>>Having load
>>>balancer on top of mod_proxy would be a nice feature, but the main 
>>>purpose for them is different.
>>
>>Different to what? Load balancing is load balancing, whether 
>>the backend protocol is HTTP, AJP or FTP.
>>
> 
> 
> HTTP is a statles protocol, and our concept is to have a constant connection
> pool to the well known application server.
> So, unlike HTTP protocol we are embedding the remote application server, and
> it just happens that we are doing it using the same TCP/IP protocol for
> that.
> 
> 
>>I see no point on making significant effort in a feature that 
>>can only be used for one protocol, that's a huge waste of an 
>>opportunity to solve the load balancing problems of backends 
>>other than tomcat.
>>
> 
> 
> Quite contraty, this is the main reason. We already have jk2 that can be
> used even for proxying HTTP requests. Are you wiling to write the http
> protocol for mod_jk2?
> 
> 
>>>The purpose of mod_ajp is to communicate with the (one or 
>>
>>more of them 
>>
>>>in a
>>>cluster) application servers using ajp13+ protocol; simple as that. 
> 
> 
>>Proxy allows you to communicate with (one or more in a 
>>cluster) applications servers using HTTP or FTP. The only 
>>difference is the protocol.
>>
> 
> 
> Again, application server != http server.
> 
> 
>>The development of proxy_ajp could see the development of 
>>modules like proxy_loadbalance or proxy_sticky, which have 
>>general application outside of the AJP protocol.
>>
> 
> 
> Agreed, pehaps some day they will convolve to the single module, but right
> now I don't see the point for it, especialy when the mod_proxy is well
> established module.
> 
> 
>>Just rewriting mod_ajp for v2.0 isn't anything different to 
>>what exists now, so I don't see the point.
>>
> 
> 
> Well, that's how you see it.
> IMO trying again to squize the apache2->Tomcat module inside some already
> present solution would again lead to nowhere, and finally rise the questions
> like we are rising today.

Not sure since mod_proxy will associate to a ajp://VIRTUALNAME, and in
such case it's up to proxy_ajp to decide to :

- keep the socket open
- handle a pool of socket
- fall back to another AJP instance in the cluster.

So I think it could be done

Mime
View raw message