httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group <ruediger.pl...@vodafone.com>
Subject Re: mod_proxy_ajp or mod_proxy_http?
Date Thu, 14 Jun 2007 13:46:51 GMT


> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Bill Stoddard 
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 14. Juni 2007 15:28
> An: dev@httpd.apache.org
> Betreff: mod_proxy_ajp or mod_proxy_http?
> 
> 
> I'm trying to understand why mod_proxy_ajp exists and what it 
> provides 
> that mod_proxy_http doesn't.
> 
> ajp13 is a binary protocol which should make the ajp13 tomcat 
> connector 
> a bit more efficient than the http11 connector; an incremental 
> performance improvement. obtained at the expense of added complexity. 
> Does mod_proxy_ajp provide any other function not available in 
> mod_proxy_http? I'm trying to decide which horse to put my 
> chips on :-)

I personally prefer mod_proxy_ajp in this case, because

- It avoids the need to parse the request in Tomcat again. This also
  increases the bar for proxy attacks like HTTP smuggling.

- The persistent connection handling currently seems to be better compared
  to keepalive connections with HTTP. There are still some nasty race conditions
  when the backend closes the connection just as we send our request to it.

- There is a basic health check for the backend *before* sending the request
  (CPING/CPONG).

AFAIK the following drawbacks on Tomcat side:

- No NIO AJP connector (but you can use the APR version of the connector).
- No usage of sendfile with the AJP connector.

Regards

Rüdiger


Mime
View raw message