tomcat-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
Subject Re: Proposed Server.xml Change (was RE: Bugzilla #512 is Bunk)
Date Sat, 03 Mar 2001 08:11:00 GMT
> Right, but that is excruciating to configure and more excruciating to
> maintain...

We need to fix that :-)

> Why not use two copies of Tomcat, each with their own mod_jk.conf-auto which
> can be included in the appropriate VirtualHost section?

Use 2 copies of tomcat as a workaround for stupid config mechanism ( I can
say that, I wrote a large part of it :-) ?

What if you have 1000 virtual hosts ? 

Don't get me wrong, sometimes it is good to have multiple instances of
tomcat ( preferably on a farm of servers, or even on the same computer :-), 
for many valid reasons - but I wouldn't do it as a workaround for

> Then we could map each ContextManager to one VirtualHost with one
> auto-generated config file, and Include them from httpd.conf for each
> VirtualHost accordingly?

Except ContextManager represents a "Server" instance, not a virtual host.

Mea culpa - a lot of people said that we need a VirtualHost object, but I
(still) think it is not actually needed - Container can represent any
"group" of URLs, including VirtualHost, Context, URLPattern, or any other

And Modules ( including config modules ) do have access to all this
information and can generate anything they need.

While this may be a bit confusing ( why don't we treat a virtual host in a
special way ) it is also much more flexible and simpler to do, with
simpler code.

> Just some ideas...

Thanks Steve. Please don't give up - maybe we can find a way to improve
the config generator, or you may help with mod_webapp ( or ajp14 ) -
i.e. extend the protocol to send Apache all the information about the
hosts/web applications.


View raw message