tomcat-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Bill Barker" <wbar...@wilshire.com>
Subject Re: mod_jk2 and apache13
Date Thu, 13 Feb 2003 07:38:19 GMT

"liug" <liug@mama.indstate.edu> wrote in message
news:b2bbic$4bj$5@localhost.localdomain...
> Bill Barker <wbarker@wilshire.com> wrote:
> > "liug" <liug@mama.indstate.edu> wrote in message
> > news:b24kvg$7ku$1@localhost.localdomain...
> >> mod_jk2 (tomcat 4.1.18) seems to compile fine with apache13,
> >> but only "mod_jk2.so" is generated. There is no "libjkjni.so".
> >> Is that a problem? Is "libjkjni.so" really needed? The mod_jk2
> >> works fine without it in my test.
> >>
> >> BTW, what is this "jni" thing in the jk2 connector? I understand
> >> we already have TCP/IP Socket and Unix domain Socket. is "jni"
> >> a third connection type? What's the benefit?
>
> > With the JNI channel, Apache and Tomcat share the same memory space.  So
the
>
> speaking of "memory", I noticed both jk2.properties and
> workers2.properties have a reference to a shm file, should
> they point to the same file?

Urm, yes.  It's used for inter-process communication.

>
> Thanks!
> frank
>
> > cost of passing off the data between the two should be cheaper (at least
in
> > theory).
>
> > There are people on the list that love using JNI with Apache 1.3.  I've
> > never understood why, so I'll let them answer.  As I understand it, the
JNI
> > channel works best with a multi-threaded server like IIS, iPlanet, or
Apache
> > 2 (with the 'worker' MPM).  As I said before, I don't see the advantages
to
> > using it with a 'pre-fork' server like Apache 1.3.
>
> >>
> >> Thanks!




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tomcat-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tomcat-user-help@jakarta.apache.org


Mime
View raw message