Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-tomcat-users-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 58253 invoked from network); 22 Sep 2007 11:41:06 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 22 Sep 2007 11:41:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 15283 invoked by uid 500); 22 Sep 2007 11:40:45 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-tomcat-users-archive@tomcat.apache.org Received: (qmail 15265 invoked by uid 500); 22 Sep 2007 11:40:45 -0000 Mailing-List: contact users-help@tomcat.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: "Tomcat Users List" Delivered-To: mailing list users@tomcat.apache.org Received: (qmail 15254 invoked by uid 99); 22 Sep 2007 11:40:45 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 22 Sep 2007 04:40:45 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of albrecht.andrzejewski@ema.fr designates 146.19.2.1 as permitted sender) Received: from [146.19.2.1] (HELO eerie.ema.fr) (146.19.2.1) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 22 Sep 2007 11:42:49 +0000 Received: from maileerie.ema.fr (maileerie [146.19.1.10]) by eerie.ema.fr (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l8MBeMQs018125 for ; Sat, 22 Sep 2007 13:40:22 +0200 (MEST) Received: from maileerie.ema.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by maileerie.ema.fr (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l8MBeMHo024691 for ; Sat, 22 Sep 2007 13:40:22 +0200 (MEST) Received: from localhost (eerie2 [146.19.2.3])by maileerie.ema.fr (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l8MBeM2I024687for ; Sat, 22 Sep 2007 13:40:22 +0200 (MEST) Received: from if02t2-89-83-246-208.d4.club-internet.fr(if02t2-89-83-246-208.d4.club-inter net.fr [89.83.246.208]) bywebmail.ema.fr (Horde MIME library) with HTTP; Sat, 22 Sep 2007 13:40:21+0200 Message-ID: <20070922134021.zdyhe2onkck4goks@webmail.ema.fr> Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2007 13:40:21 +0200 From: albrecht andrzejewski To: users@tomcat.apache.org Subject: RE: Basic question - Ingterating Tomcat with Apache References: <9A6D0119C63B7940B21E6A01841BBB77037BBC0E@USA0300MS04.na.xerox.n et> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; DelSp=Yes; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) H3 (4.1.3) X-imss-version: 2.048 X-imss-result: Passed X-imss-approveListMatch: *@ema.fr X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-3.0 (eerie.ema.fr [146.19.2.1]); Sat, 22 Sep 2007 13:40:22 +0200 (MEST) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Quoting Peter Crowther : > > What are you doing that doesn't just need a vanilla Tomcat? Peter... I plan to have a box, and I just think about pro and cons... I think tomcat stand alone is -> easier to deploy. And that's all. I think apache as a front end is a more flexible and secure solution. -> if apache fails, tomcat is not affected -> if tomcat fails, apache can redirect request to another tomcat -> when you serve static content juste like image of your site and all =20 static text part , javascripts, etc ( i mean... dynamic content is =20 often just an hour ticking at the top of the page!) apche can better =20 handle the request and serve them quickier (with cache). Am i wrong ? As i have currently nothing pre-installed on it... and =20 it would be fine to know what you are thinking about it. You seem to =20 be pro vanilla tomcat... But just let us know WHEN pure tomcat has to =20 be choosen ! I need an expert point of view, so tell us about what you experienced ! Thanks :-) ---------------------------------------------------- Ce message a ete envoye par le serveur IMP de l'EMA. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To start a new topic, e-mail: users@tomcat.apache.org To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tomcat.apache.org