tomcat-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jess Holle <>
Subject Re: Apache 2.2 and mod_proxy_ajp
Date Fri, 02 Dec 2005 16:08:00 GMT
Chris Lear wrote:

>* Jess Holle wrote (02/12/05 13:53):
>>I have some vague recollection that performance of mod_proxy_ajp tested 
>>just /slightly /better than mod_jk.
>But where is the information on this?
It should be in Apache 2.2's doc set, but it would not surprise me at 
all if this were a bit sparse as of yet.

>I joined this list a few days ago after Googling like crazy for
>information on the most sensible and supported way to connect apache to
>tomcat (or whether to drop it and just use the http connector). In the
>end, I'm using mod_jk, because I couldn't find *anything* helpful on the
>web about configuring or using mod_proxy_ajp, apart from some
>theoretical examples that tended to be incompatibile with one another.
>The only thing people seem to agree on is that mod_jk2 is no use, though
>that had the option of unix sockets, which I would have thought would be
>a good thing.
mod_proxy_ajp is only in Apache 2.2 (and the 2.1 development stream 
leading to 2.2) and 2.2 was just released, so obviously it is going to 
fairly little information about it as of yet.

mod_jk2 never became stable.  mod_jk is the thing for Apache 2.0, is 
well documented, and works fine.

>I might revert to using the http connector. The reasons for not doing
>this are: 1) I want apache to do SSL, 2) I don't want to run tomcat as
>root, and using local port forwarding is a hassle, and 3) there's a bit
>more flexibility in the apache route.
The other major reason for using mod_jk or mod_proxy_ajp is load 
balancing from Apache over several Tomcats.

Jess Holle

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message