Uses up more of those idle resources.
No, there is no reason to use Apache if all you are serving is dynamic pages.
At 06:20 PM 10/1/2001 -0700, you wrote:
If you're committed to a project where virtually all of the pages will be
dynamically generated, through JSP most likely, and you're
If you're committed to a project where virtually all of the pages will be
dynamically generated, through JSP most likely, and you're committed to using
Tomcat, is there ANY good reason to use Apache, in addition to Tomcat?
I surveyed the FAQ, and I didn't notice this question being specifically
Hey David,
Don't know if you remember me from GTE NMO or not... Hope all's well with
you and BEST.
Apache supports HTTP 1.1 whereas the last I heard, Tomcat was only HTTP 1.0,
so each request comes over it's own connection rather than sharing as with
Apache. This means that Apache is still a
* If you have Apache already installed, and don't want users to use
a non-port-80 URL for JSP/servlet based applications.
Very true, otherwise you need to run Tomcat as root.
Also, Apache itself has some nice features, like mod_rewrite that can be
helpful to handles changes in structure and
* If you have lots of static content that can be served from a directory
other than the webapp's context path (right now, current Tomcat
versions serve static content within the webapp directory faster
stand-alone than they do behind Apache).
Craig, what happens if the images are IN
