httpd-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Steffen Heil" <li...@steffen-heil.de>
Subject AW: AW: [users@httpd] Java and Apache Web Server
Date Sun, 07 Nov 2004 19:23:12 GMT
Hi

> That's certainly not true.  Apache has always supported a range of dynamic
content, ...

Which? I don't believe that apache itself serves anything dynamic.
All dynamic things I can think of in apache are implemented in modules or
suexec'ed.
Am I missing something?
How would you write dynamic pages with apache only?

> and since Apache 2.0 has been a powerful applications platform in its own
right, without any need for the older extensions such as CGI, PHP, or indeed
tomcat.

Please explain this. I would be very interested...

> I'm not sure how true that is since mod_gcj, but that's certainly the
usual way to use java with apache.

As far as I can tell from the "Design Overview" page of mod_gcj, it is used
to run java cgis.
It does NOT turn apache into a servlet container.

I want to make clear, that servlets and servlet containers are much more
flexible that cgi programms. There are lots of things, servlets can do,
which cgi's cannot. mod_gcj is propably a great project, if you want to
write cgis in java and I will keep track on it. There are a lot of great use
cases. However, it will never repalce a servlet container, exspecially since
those may deliver complerer J2EE frameworks.
A lot of "hard core cgi programmers" seem to ignore that additional benefit,
since they do not know it.

> Nonsense.  If used as a cacheing proxy it can speed it up significantly.
> And mod_jk should now be superseded by mod_proxy, since the tomcat folks
implemented the proxy load balancer and the proxy_ajp protocol module.
> That was about 2-3 months ago IIRC.

This depends largely on your projects. Most of your servlerts need to
disable caching, since different users get different views to the
information. This is propably true for most web applications. So for us,
proxies are no benefit. And you cannot say, that apache and mod_jk (or
mod_proxy) do not add overhead. That is simply a fact. Maybe it is not that
large, but if you serve almost everything from a tomcat behind apache, these
overheads add up - while they are simply not nessessary, of you gain no
addition benefit from apache.

And as far as I know, mod_proxy with these features is still beta. I am
waiting for it, was I will propably try it for the few projects we have,
that really use apache in the mix. However, everything said for mod_jk will
be true for mod_proxy. You cannot include an additional layer with NO
overhead. You can just keep it small.

You are right, if your application allows caching. However, as already
stated this is not the case in most situations. At least from my point of
view.


Regards,
  Stefffen

Mime
View raw message