Bill Barker wrote:
Antonio Fiol Bonnín [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
However, I am worried about what you say about Apache 2.0.x and the
'worker' MPM. Could you please tell me about the real-world
inconveniences of having 3/4 Apache 1.3.X with 2/3 tomcats behind?
The mod_jk loadbalancer doesn't work
David Rees [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bill Barker wrote:
Antonio Fiol Bonnín [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
However, I am worried about what you say about Apache 2.0.x and the
'worker' MPM. Could you please tell me about the real-world
inconveniences of having
Bill Barker wrote:
I'm curious, what are the issues with loadbalancing in mod_jk with a
pre-forking Apache?
Basically it comes down to the fact that the children don't talk to one
another, so each one has its own idea of the relative loads. This usually
results in a distribution (for the
Kwok Peng Tuck wrote:
I'm no expert in load balancing and stuff like that, but shouldn't you
load balance tomcat as well ?
If I could do everything I wanted to...
No. I am trying, but I cannot do that yet. Budget is not ready and
purchase timings are far too long.
Thanks anyway.
Antonio
john d. haro wrote:
What is the load on your web servers?
Very low.
Could you repurpose a web server and
load balance the app server instead?
Web servers are light machines (uniprocessor, low memory, ...), while
app server is a heavyweight (two nice fast processors, 4Gb RAM, ...).
Web
Bill Barker wrote:
In theory, I'd go with Kwok's recommendation: one Apache with it's own
load-balancer, and 3 Tomcats instead of 3 Apaches. However, in the
real-world, this would require you to upgrade to Apache 2.0.x with the
'worker' MPM.
We cannot repurpose machines. Three web servers (a
Antonio Fiol Bonnín [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bill Barker wrote:
In theory, I'd go with Kwok's recommendation: one Apache with it's own
load-balancer, and 3 Tomcats instead of 3 Apaches. However, in the
real-world, this would require you to upgrade to
In theory, I'd go with Kwok's recommendation: one Apache with it's own
load-balancer, and 3 Tomcats instead of 3 Apaches. However, in the
real-world, this would require you to upgrade to Apache 2.0.x with the
'worker' MPM.
Yes, for your current config, you need to have your maxProcessors
.
Good luck
John Haro
-Original Message-
From: Kwok Peng Tuck [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2003 12:47 AM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: Production server tuning
I'm no expert in load balancing and stuff like that, but shouldn't you
load balance tomcat as well
From: Antonio Fiol Bonnín fiol.bonnin () terra ! es
Subject: Production server tuning
For the first case, I reckon I might have found the cause:
Apache MaxClients is set to 200, and Tomcat maxProcessors was set to
something about 150. Taking into account that there are 3 Apache, that
means
This is good info. Thanks for posting!!
John
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Antonio Fiol Bonnín fiol.bonnin () terra ! es
Subject: Production server tuning
For the first case, I reckon I might have found the cause:
Apache MaxClients is set to 200, and Tomcat maxProcessors was set
Hello,
We have already gone live, and we actually spend too much time dead. I
hope some of you can help me a bit about the problems we have.
Architecture:
3 Apache web servers (1.3.23) behind a replicated load balancer in DMZ
1 Tomcat server (4.1.9) behind firewall, in secure zone.
1 Firewall
I'm no expert in load balancing and stuff like that, but shouldn't you
load balance tomcat as well ?
Antonio Fiol Bonnín wrote:
Hello,
We have already gone live, and we actually spend too much time dead. I
hope some of you can help me a bit about the problems we have.
Architecture:
3 Apache
13 matches
Mail list logo
