tomcat-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christopher Schultz <>
Subject Re: IIS7/isapi/tomcat performance
Date Tue, 01 Mar 2011 20:42:37 GMT
Hash: SHA1


On 3/1/2011 2:49 PM, Tony Anecito wrote:
> I understand it is from the core AWS but the important thing for me was to 
> eliminate AJP because in a AWS standalone I had used to communicate AJP.
> When I enabled ARP I did not have to do anything with AJP.
> So does ARP communicate with the servlet conatiner in a more efficiant manner?

(Presuming s/ARP/APR/g)

APR is just a connector strategy, like the BIO or NIO connectors. There
are APR connectors for both HTTP and AJP.

If you're saying that you switched from BIO/AJP to APR/HTTP, I'm not
surprised you experienced a performance improvement: you're eliminated
the web server altogether.

If instead you are still using a web server out front and using HTTP
instead of AJP to communicate with the back-end, I'd be interested in
your configuration, environment, and observed performance gain.
Generally speaking, use of AJP is slightly faster than proxied HTTP but
there are certainly some trade-offs (like lack of encrypted
communication support for AJP).

APR handles connections differently than the Default BIO connector. See
for notes about the relative capabilities of the connectors (for HTTP).
There is
no NIO connector for AJP, but I would imagine that the comparison between
the other two HTTP connectors is applicable to the AJP connectors as well.

- -chris
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla -


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

View raw message