tomcat-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Costin Manolache <cos...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [Proposal] Remove older of the two BIO AJP connectors
Date Sat, 04 Apr 2009 16:16:35 GMT
On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 9:03 AM, David Jencks <david_jencks@yahoo.com> wrote:

> I don't really know what you guys are talking about but it might be you are
> looking for a cross-platform multiplexing asynchronous message exchange
> system.  If so you might look into activemq's openwire transport.  IIUC they
> have a message grammar that is compiled into code for various platforms
> including java, .net, c++, etc.
>

One more option to choose from - does anyone have experience with this ? How
many dependencies, performance, etc ?

My understanding of 'what we talk about' is what to do with mod_jk -
deprecate/remove old code, add few features
to better match current tomcat ( and current requirements - larger clusters,
etc ). It seems there is some agreement that
current AJP protocol won't work, but bigger disagreement on weather to just
do nothing at all ( i.e. just maintain current
code ), or do some small addition to AJP, use HTTP, etc.

Costin



>
> thanks
> david jencks
>
>
> On Apr 4, 2009, at 8:42 AM, Costin Manolache wrote:
>
>  On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 8:12 AM, Mladen Turk <mturk@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>  Costin Manolache wrote:
>>>
>>>  So in essence you have a new protocol but the sole
>>>>
>>>>> difference is how you describe it.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> The API can be something like:
>>>> - legacyRequest(RequestMessage) - whatever we have in the current AJP
>>>> protocol
>>>> - getServerLoad() and whatever new we wanted to add
>>>>
>>>> Instead of defining AJP extensions, we just pick one of the marshalling
>>>> libs
>>>> and use them
>>>> for encoding the new methods.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  Again, you are presuming a new protocol and IMO everyone
>>> here are just getting nasty red spots on their faces when
>>> you do such a thing ;)
>>>
>>>
>> My understanding was that some people want to add features to mod_jk
>> to support extended load balancing, eventually the fancy async stuff, etc.
>>
>> I can't see how this can be done without proto changes - current AJP won't
>> work.
>> And this is quite specific to tomcat, you can't dump it on incubator.
>>
>> What I'm trying to suggest is that a 'new protocol' ( as in - enhanced
>> AJP,
>> AJP2.0, etc )
>> is not a good idea. Instead  the extensions needed should be done by using
>> existing libraries and protocols, and when this is stable the AJP protocol
>> should be
>> deprecated (thus reducing the code size). Thrift/protobufs can be used
>> quite
>> easily
>> on top of an existing transport, as payload, and can represent all the
>> messages
>> you want.
>>
>>
>> Costin
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tomcat.apache.org
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message