tomcat-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Bill Barker" <wbar...@wilshire.com>
Subject Re: Mod_ajp initial
Date Sun, 25 Jul 2004 22:53:30 GMT
I'm with Graham on this.  Personally, I have very little interest in a
mod_ajp module, but I am interested in proxy_ajp, proxy_lb, etc.  Of course,
since j-t-c has long doubled as j-t-sandbox, this means that I'm +0 for
committing your stuff there.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Graham Leggett" <minfrin@sharp.fm>
To: "Tomcat Developers List" <tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2004 9:58 AM
Subject: Re: Mod_ajp initial


> Mladen Turk wrote:
>
> > Yes, that's the general idea.
> > We focus on v2.0 and TCP/IP protocol (for now).
>
> Cool.
>
> > Well, the development will not be over in 2 days, and the plan is to use
> > mod_ajp as a base for testing new protocol extensions, and to be always
a
> > little bit faster and better then mod_proxy with proxy_ajp :).
>
> Don't forget mod_proxy is just a framework - there would be no "faster
> than proxy_ajp" because prioxy_ajp would be mod_ajp with config
> directives arranged differently.
>
> Remember that the benchmarks that were done recently compared mod_ajp
> with mod_proxy_http, not mod_proxy. As is clear from the benchmarks,
> mod_proxy_http could benefit greatly from a connection cache for a
> start. If that connection cache were protocol neutral, then
> mod_proxy_ftp could benefit from the connection pool too.
>
> > The mod_proxy itself will have to face a lot of extra work too.
>
> Exactly - which is why I'm dead keen to have the AJP work aligned with
> proxy, so that proxy can benefit from AJP features like load balancing,
etc.
>
> > It will at least have to have a maintainable set of connection pools for
> > each backend server, so one can implement a load balancer from them, and
> > also control the number of connections the backend can handle.
> > mod_core will need an extra work too, so that the scoreboard can be
extended
> > to store the lb params. This is essential if one wishes to have a load
> > balancer.
> >
> > If you succeed to build such a feature for mod_proxy and http protocol,
then
> > we will already have a ready proxy_ajp protocol extension.
>
>  From the sounds of things, many of these features exist (or will soon
> exist) in mod_ajp. Moving or copying these features out of mod_ajp and
> into either mod_proxy* or any of the core modules isn't a difficult
> thing to do. If you create patches that you need for either proxy or the
> core to support stuff that you need, I'll make sure they get into httpd
> v2.1 with support for inclusion into httpd v2.0.
>
> Regards,
> Graham
> --
>


Mime
View raw message