tomcat-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rainer Jung <rainer.j...@kippdata.de>
Subject Re: mod_proxy or mod_jk?
Date Mon, 19 Nov 2007 14:12:01 GMT
Rocco Scappatura wrote:
> Hello.
> 
> I would like to publish a Web application running under Tomcat.
> 
> I'm using Apache 2 as Web server.
> 
> Basically, I have two opportunities:
> 
> 1) mod_jk
> 2) mod_proxy
> 
> I've tried the first. So I discover that I ve:
> 
> - Create an alias in httpd.conf so that al static pages are processed
> directly by Apache2.
> - Use JkMount directive so that path is mapped to worker (and so to Tomcat)
> 
> I don't know I have well understod the concept, but I have noted that
> application doesn't work correcltly. For example, assuming that the path
> of the application is '/path'. When I accesst to http://<hostname>/path
> all works fine. But if I access to http://<hostname>/path/subpath I get
> Visualizzation errors (It seems tome that it misses CSS.. and so on).
> 
> I read that it is possible to use mod proxy.
> 
> Now, I would like to know from mailing list if mod_proxy is the best
> choice or otherwise if I have to solve problem similiar to the one I ve
> pointed out above, and to use mod_jk.

Your problem sounds like a simple config issue, but since you didn't 
show us your config, who knows ...

mod_proxy_* vs. mod_jk: mod_proxy_* comes automatically with httpd and 
is more tightly integrated into it, mod_jk is still more powerful 
especially concerning complex instance topologies. So your decision 
might depend on how complex you expect your final setup to be.

> Thanks,
> 
> rocsca

Regards,

Rainer

---------------------------------------------------------------------
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


Mime
View raw message