tomcat-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Steffen Heil" <li...@steffen-heil.de>
Subject AW: newbie questions
Date Sat, 02 Oct 2004 21:05:34 GMT
Hi

> Finally for the stupid question of the day. I notice alot of information
re: merging apache and tomcat. My question is why? I'm assuming the Apache
is better at serving web pages that Tomcat but is that the only reason? It
would seem that for a small website, just having Tomcat would be fine. Any
thoughts?

Most webmasters started with apache and somewhen decided to do dynamic stuff
with tomcat. So they didn't want to break with apache and use tomcat as
add-on, as they did with php. And people tend not to change running systems.
Moreover older tomcat versions, exspecially older java vms were slower then
apache was.

Nowadays, java vms are faster and tomcat is faster as well. And there are
really big sites, which use tomcat without apache or another web server. [1]
So, YES, it IS fine just having Tomcat for a small website, as well as for
larger sites.

The only scenario in that I would use apache as webserver in front of tomcat
if the site also requires php or another scripting language additionally to
java. Tomcat has it's CGI servlets, but it is far from beating apaches
mod_php in speed (up to now...).
 
Regards,
  Steffen

[1] I was very impressed finding jake2, which is an java implementation of
quake2. I always thought java would be fast for servlets and such but leaked
speed in graphics and video compared to non-vm languages, but jake2 reaches
about 99% of the frame rate of quake2 on the same hardware...

Mime
View raw message