tial of maxing out connections at httpd, at mod_jk, and
>>>> also at Tomcat.
> Yes, and you'll also need enough file handles and ports available
> for all that. If one client-connection requires a connection to the
> web server (1 file handle, 1 port) and a connection from
> htt
the potential of maxing
out connections at httpd, at mod_jk, and also at Tomcat.
Yes, and you'll also need enough file handles and ports available for
all that. If one client-connection requires a connection to the web
server (1 file handle, 1 port) and a connection from httpd->Tomcat (2
f
handle, 1 port) and a connection from httpd->Tomcat (2
file handles, 2 ports), it may add up quickly.
Are you sure you need httpd at all? I assume since you are AWS that
you are using a load-balancer. What purpose does httpd serve in your
setup?
> We are looking at setting up monitors to trac
I'm setting up an environment that has the potential for a large number
of simultaneous requests coming in. I have a basic Apache HTTPD with
mod_jk talking to Tomcat, all on the same Amazon EC2 instance. From my
understanding, I have the potential of maxing out connections at httpd,
at
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Michael,
On 7/8/19 15:36, Osipov, Michael wrote:
> Christopher,
>
> Am 2019-07-08 um 19:55 schrieb Christopher Schultz:
>> Michael,
>>
>> On 7/8/19 03:58, Osipov, Michael wrote:
>>> Christopher,
>>>
>>> Am 2019-07-05 um 19:07 schrieb Christopher
Christopher,
Am 2019-07-08 um 19:55 schrieb Christopher Schultz:
Michael,
On 7/8/19 03:58, Osipov, Michael wrote:
Christopher,
Am 2019-07-05 um 19:07 schrieb Christopher Schultz:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Michael,
On 7/5/19 11:00, Osipov, Michael wrote:
Hi
Michael,
On 7/8/19 03:58, Osipov, Michael wrote:
> Christopher,
>
> Am 2019-07-05 um 19:07 schrieb Christopher Schultz:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA256
>>
>> Michael,
>>
>> On 7/5/19 11:00, Osipov, Michael wrote:
>>> Hi Christopher,
>>>
>>> Am 2019-07-02 um 17:49 schrieb
Christopher,
Am 2019-07-05 um 19:07 schrieb Christopher Schultz:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Michael,
On 7/5/19 11:00, Osipov, Michael wrote:
Hi Christopher,
Am 2019-07-02 um 17:49 schrieb [ext] Osipov, Michael:
[...]
During your ~1min stall, Tomcat is still waiting
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Michael,
On 7/5/19 11:00, Osipov, Michael wrote:
> Hi Christopher,
>
> Am 2019-07-02 um 17:49 schrieb [ext] Osipov, Michael:
>>
>> [...]
>>> During your ~1min stall, Tomcat is still waiting for data,
>>> right? When the connection fails, Tomcat
Hi Christopher,
Am 2019-07-02 um 17:49 schrieb [ext] Osipov, Michael:
[...]
During your ~1min stall, Tomcat is still waiting for data, right? When
the connection fails, Tomcat drops its error message at the same time,
right? Can you post a stack trace of what the Tomcat thread is doing
at
e try again later.
Apache/2.4.39 (FreeBSD) OpenSSL/1.1.1a-freebsd
mod_auth_gssapi/1.6.1 Server at sitex-ldadw.ad001.siemens.net
Port 443 * Closing connection 0 *
TLSv1.3 (OUT), TLS alert, close notify (256):
real1m0,175s user0m0,047s sys 0m0,007s
Where can I start digging? Tomcat? HTTPd
> * TLSv1.3 (IN), TLS handshake, CERT verify (15): * TLSv1.3 (IN),
>> TLS handshake, Finished (20): * TLSv1.3 (OUT), TLS change cipher,
>> Change cipher spec (1): * TLSv1.3 (OUT), TLS handshake, Finished
>> (20): * SSL connection using TLSv1.3 / TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 *
>>
sing connection 0
* TLSv1.3 (OUT), TLS alert, close notify (256):
real1m0,175s
user0m0,047s
sys 0m0,007s
Where can I start digging? Tomcat? HTTPd? Maybe I should run HTTPd in
debug mode for a day and analyze that?
Pointers greatly appreciated.
Reg
manian wrote:
> > I have Httpd process and Tomcat instances both running on 2
> > different machines. The communication between them happens through
> > AJP protocol (mod_jk) which doesn't support encryption. But we are
> > using some features of mod_jk like automatic passing
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
All,
On 5/25/16 11:30 AM, Christopher Schultz wrote:
> Mohanavelu,
>
> On 5/25/16 10:21 AM, Mohanavelu Subramanian wrote:
>> I have Httpd process and Tomcat instances both running on 2
>> different machines. The communication
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Mohanavelu,
On 5/25/16 10:21 AM, Mohanavelu Subramanian wrote:
> I have Httpd process and Tomcat instances both running on 2
> different machines. The communication between them happens through
> AJP protocol (mod_jk) which doesn't support e
On 25.05.2016 16:21, Mohanavelu Subramanian wrote:
Hi All,
Good Morning.
I have Httpd process and Tomcat instances both running on 2 different
machines. The communication between them happens through AJP protocol
(mod_jk) which doesnt support encryption. But we are using some features
Hi All,
Good Morning.
I have Httpd process and Tomcat instances both running on 2 different
machines. The communication between them happens through AJP protocol
(mod_jk) which doesnt support encryption. But we are using some features of
mod_jk like automatic passing of security information like
Hello,
I am working on an Apache module. The module is installed in an
Apache http server that handles requests for a Tomcat server. When
requests come from a mobile device, the jsessionid parameter is
appended to the URI in the usual manner, e.g.
/i/n_my_page.jsp;jsessionid=123adsfadsfsadf
Michael Powe wrote:
Hello,
I am working on an Apache module. The module is installed in an
Apache http server that handles requests for a Tomcat server. When
requests come from a mobile device, the jsessionid parameter is
appended to the URI in the usual manner, e.g.
Hassan Schroeder wrote:
Just to get this into the archives for the next time it comes up
http://tomcatexpert.com/blog/2010/03/24/myth-or-truth-one-should-always-use-apache-httpd-front-apache-tomcat-improve-perform
because I don't know if the author (a certain mthomas) will mention
it here
2010/3/27 André Warnier a...@ice-sa.com:
http://tomcatexpert.com/blog/2010/03/24/myth-or-truth-one-should-always-use-apache-httpd-front-apache-tomcat-improve-perform
Might this not also be worth preserving in the Tomcat FAQ/wiki ?
There is
http://wiki.apache.org/tomcat/FAQ
Thanks for the link.
au
http://www.xprad.org/
Hassan Schroeder-2 wrote:
Just to get this into the archives for the next time it comes up
http://tomcatexpert.com/blog/2010/03/24/myth-or-truth-one-should-always-use-apache-httpd-front-apache-tomcat-improve-perform
because I don't know
benchmark numbers help to show that
it is indeed a myth that Tomcat needs HTTPD in front of it in order to get
good performance serving static files. And, it's great to see benchmark
results for file sizes that I wasn't able to benchmark.
Mark: I like your text about some of the other reasons people
Hi ,
We have a online shop developed as a suite of JSR168 portlets. On some
portlets we list products and images (so there are about 25 images per
page + other images).
One image has around 250k.
Performance was greatly improved after we put apache httpd in front
(images served by apache
On 25/03/2010 01:39, Rémy Maucherat wrote:
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 1:50 AM, Mark Thomas ma...@apache.org wrote:
Chris deserves a lot of the credit. Without his figures, it is just opinion.
That's the second benchmark that I see today that has odd numbers.
What did you think was odd?
Mark
On 25/03/2010 07:01, Jason Brittain wrote:
Very entertaining reading! Thanks Chris and Mark for re-benchmarking,
explaining, and giving your opinions on the results. I'm not entirely sure
how I missed Chris' benchmark results email, almost exactly one year ago
now. Chris: there are no units
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Mark,
On 3/24/2010 8:50 PM, Mark Thomas wrote:
On 25/03/2010 00:26, Hassan Schroeder wrote:
Just to get this into the archives for the next time it comes up
http://tomcatexpert.com/blog/2010/03/24/myth-or-truth-one-should-always-use-apache-httpd
-httpd-front-apache-tomcat-improve-perform
because I don't know if the author (a certain mthomas) will mention
it here. :-)
(via @springsource on Twitter)
Chris deserves a lot of the credit. Without his figures, it is just opinion.
Hey, I could have been making all that stuff up. BTW
Virtual Machine 1.6.0_15_b03 (client and server
JVMs were tested separately: see the individual tests for details).
Apache httpd 2.2.12 was used for comparison. Both httpd and Tomcat were
used in their default configurations where applicable (that is, no
performance-oriented tuning was performed on either
Just to get this into the archives for the next time it comes up
http://tomcatexpert.com/blog/2010/03/24/myth-or-truth-one-should-always-use-apache-httpd-front-apache-tomcat-improve-perform
because I don't know if the author (a certain mthomas) will mention
it here. :-)
(via @springsource
On 25/03/2010 00:26, Hassan Schroeder wrote:
Just to get this into the archives for the next time it comes up
http://tomcatexpert.com/blog/2010/03/24/myth-or-truth-one-should-always-use-apache-httpd-front-apache-tomcat-improve-perform
because I don't know if the author (a certain mthomas
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 1:50 AM, Mark Thomas ma...@apache.org wrote:
Chris deserves a lot of the credit. Without his figures, it is just opinion.
That's the second benchmark that I see today that has odd numbers.
Rémy
-
To
I'm having the same issue as documented in:
http://www.nabble.com/httpd-JK-Tomcat-hung-connections-td10403182.html
For our situation, we haven't hit the server reached MaxClients setting
issue yet, but we easily could.
We also have this same config running on a Windows cluster
On 10.10.2009 16:45, darinpope wrote:
I'm having the same issue as documented in:
http://www.nabble.com/httpd-JK-Tomcat-hung-connections-td10403182.html
For our situation, we haven't hit the server reached MaxClients setting
issue yet, but we easily could.
Use thread dumps to see, what
Hello All
I have a clustered/load-balanced Apache httpd and Tomcat setup. I have one
httpd front end that load balances for two Tomcat back ends. I now want to add
SSL to the mix but I am confused. Do I add the SSL to the httpd server, to the
two Tomcat servers, or to all of them?
Thank
print this e-mail unless necessary
-Original Message-
From: Alston, Brian (US SSA) [mailto:brian.als...@baesystems.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 2009 7:03 PM
To: users@tomcat.apache.org
Subject: Which Do I SSL - httpd or Tomcat?
Hello All
I have a clustered/load-balanced Apache httpd
From: Alston, Brian (US SSA) [mailto:brian.als...@baesystems.com]
I have a clustered/load-balanced Apache httpd and Tomcat
setup. I have one httpd front end that load balances for two
Tomcat back ends. I now want to add SSL to the mix but I am
confused. Do I add the SSL to the httpd
Hi,
Thank you for reading and replying. Can I assume from your reply that if I
am not on a secure LAN that I should SSL httpd and both Tomcat servers?
Thank You
From: Zeeshan Ahmad [zah...@i2cinc.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 2009 9:15 AM
To: 'Tomcat
Hi,
Thank you for reading and replying. Can I assume from your reply that if I
am not on a secure LAN that I should SSL httpd and both Tomcat servers?
It depends, is your tomcat accessible directly instead of through httpd?
HTH
Regards,
Serge Fonville
From: Alston, Brian (US SSA) [mailto:brian.als...@baesystems.com]
Thank you for reading and replying. Can I assume from
your reply that if I am not on a secure LAN that I should SSL
httpd and both Tomcat servers?
SSL between httpd and Tomcat will protect the channel between httpd
necessary
-Original Message-
From: Alston, Brian (US SSA) [mailto:brian.als...@baesystems.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 2009 7:25 PM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: RE: Which Do I SSL - httpd or Tomcat?
Hi,
Thank you for reading and replying. Can I assume from your reply that if
I am
unless necessary
-Original Message-
From: Alston, Brian (US SSA) [mailto:brian.als...@baesystems.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 2009 7:25 PM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: RE: Which Do I SSL - httpd or Tomcat?
Hi,
Thank you for reading and replying. Can I assume from your reply that if
I
facilement
être sujets à la manipulation, nous ne pouvons accepter aucune responsabilité
pour le contenu fourni.
From: brian.als...@baesystems.com
To: users@tomcat.apache.org
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2009 10:15:47 -0400
Subject: RE: Which Do I SSL - httpd or Tomcat?
All
Well ... I believe
three servers.
From: Martin Gainty [mgai...@hotmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 2009 10:27 AM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: RE: Which Do I SSL - httpd or Tomcat?
Brian
if you're running TC standalone (without Apache or any other webserver FE)
an excellent
Alston, Brian (US SSA) wrote:
What I have is 3 virtual servers (VMWare - Windows Server 2003). One
server has Apache httpd v2.2.11 and two other servers running Apache Tomcat
v6.0.18. The Tomcat servers are independently accessible from outside of the httpd
server; so, I assume that I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Chuck,
On 5/25/2009 1:30 PM, Caldarale, Charles R wrote:
From: Caldarale, Charles R
Subject: RE: Apache httpd vs Tomcat static content performance [more
results]
There are some extracts from the 2007 O'Reilly Tomcat book about
benchmarking
From: Caldarale, Charles R
Subject: RE: Apache httpd vs Tomcat static content performance [more
results]
There are some extracts from the 2007 O'Reilly Tomcat book about benchmarking
on somewhat newer hardware than Chris is using:
http://www.devshed.com/c/b/BrainDump/
The interesting
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
All,
The message below was garbled when sent. Fortunately, it ended up being
preserved correctly in my sent message folder. Here it is.
- -chris
- Original Message
Subject: Re: Apache httpd vs Tomcat static content performance
binfqTJI0hlYT.bin
Description: PGP/MIME version identification
Christopher Schultz wrote:
Chris, there's something wrong with this post.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tomcat.apache.org
From: André Warnier [mailto:a...@ice-sa.com]
Subject: Re: Apache httpd vs Tomcat static content performance [more
results]
Chris, there's something wrong with this post.
You have to use lemon juice and a heat source to read it...
- Chuck
THIS COMMUNICATION MAY CONTAIN CONFIDENTIAL
Actually, I was thinking more of disabling the AccessLog in httpd, to
see how much impact that had.
(That's also less additional tests to run ;-))
Christopher Schultz wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
André,
On 5/19/2009 2:28 PM, André Warnier wrote:
Christopher Schultz
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
All,
So, I have some data from last night. It's about what you'd expect,
except that the NIO+sendfile connector test failed most of the time: the
client got something like apr_connect: Connection reset by peer when
it tried to connect to the server.
I'm a bit puzzled:
In your previous tests it looked like that Apache is outperforming
(ok, not really) Coyote w APR when the files grew bigger.
In your last results I can't see that pattern - actually, I don't see
/any/ pattern...
Any idea how come?
Cheers
Gregor
--
just because your
From: Gregor Schneider [mailto:rc4...@googlemail.com]
Subject: Re: Apache httpd vs Tomcat static content performance [some
results]
In your last results I can't see that pattern - actually, I don't see
/any/ pattern...
Quantum mechanics?
- Chuck
THIS COMMUNICATION MAY CONTAIN
From: Caldarale, Charles R
Subject: RE: Apache httpd vs Tomcat static content performance [some
results]
In your last results I can't see that pattern - actually, I don't see
/any/ pattern...
Quantum mechanics?
More seriously, we may be seeing artifacts of various buffering sizes
Christopher Schultz wrote:
...
Thanks for the work. At least it may put to rest some gross misconceptions.
Now just a question : in the httpd tests, did you have an AccessLog
enabled ? I would imagine you did not have an AccessLogValve enabled in
Tomcat, and I wonder if it makes any
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Gregor,
On 5/19/2009 12:59 PM, Gregor Schneider wrote:
I'm a bit puzzled:
In your previous tests it looked like that Apache is outperforming
(ok, not really) Coyote w APR when the files grew bigger.
I disagree with that conclusion. My
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
André,
On 5/19/2009 2:28 PM, André Warnier wrote:
Christopher Schultz wrote:
...
Thanks for the work. At least it may put to rest some gross
misconceptions.
Now just a question : in the httpd tests, did you have an AccessLog
enabled ? I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
All,
Last week, I decided to actually run my own performance measurements.
Before I waste a lot of time benchmarking, I wanted to vet my
methodology so I get all the data worth taking.
I'm using ApacheBench 2.3 (ships with httpd 2.2.10) as my
From: Christopher Schultz [mailto:ch...@christopherschultz.net]
Subject: Apache httpd vs Tomcat static content performance
I will be comparing an out-of-the-box prefork MPM httpd 2.2.10
configuration against an out-of-the-box Tomcat 5.5.26 Coyote, APR, and
APR without sendfile
From: Christopher Schultz [mailto:ch...@christopherschultz.net]
1. Is the number of requests (100, sufficient? It seems to take
forever on this machine... my Coyote tests took longer than
overnight.
You want enough tests that they're sensitive to statistically significant
:06 -0400
From: ch...@christopherschultz.net
To: users@tomcat.apache.org
Subject: Apache httpd vs Tomcat static content performance
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
All,
Last week, I decided to actually run my own performance measurements.
Before I waste a lot of time
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Chuck,
On 5/18/2009 10:33 AM, Peter Crowther wrote:
From: Christopher Schultz [mailto:ch...@christopherschultz.net] 1.
Is the number of requests (100, sufficient? It seems to take
forever on this machine... my Coyote tests took longer than
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Martin,
On 5/18/2009 10:47 AM, Martin Gainty wrote:
the apache httpd [crowd] may cry foul because you are testing with a
prefork config instead of worker assuming you can scare up another
processor
I'm happy to re-run the tests using a worker MPM
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 5/18/2009 11:23 AM, Christopher Schultz wrote:
Chuck,
Er, Peter. Sorry 'bout that.
- -chris
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
From: Christopher Schultz [mailto:ch...@christopherschultz.net]
I suppose I could gauge each test so it would take (roughly) a certain
amount of time (say, 10 minutes). At least then I'd know how long the
entire battery would take :)
I think that's probably a better approach.
Okay. My
Entertainment, Inc.
WORK: 512-623-5913
CELL: 512-426-3929
www.KingsIsle.com
-Original Message-
From: Christopher Schultz [mailto:ch...@christopherschultz.net]
Sent: Monday, May 18, 2009 10:24 AM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: Apache httpd vs Tomcat static content performance
-BEGIN
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Chuck,
On 5/18/2009 10:32 AM, Caldarale, Charles R wrote:
From: Christopher Schultz [mailto:ch...@christopherschultz.net]
Subject: Apache httpd vs Tomcat static content performance
I will be comparing an out-of-the-box prefork MPM httpd 2.2.10
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Peter,
On 5/18/2009 11:37 AM, Peter Crowther wrote:
I suppose I could gauge each test so it would take (roughly) a certain
amount of time (say, 10 minutes). At least then I'd know how long the
entire battery would take :)
I think that's
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Robin,
On 5/18/2009 11:35 AM, Robin Wilson wrote:
I'm curious by your comment that Coyote/APR is performing on par with
httpd, from the results in your first message I saw it was a pretty
big difference. Or are you saying that wasn't using APR?
Peter Crowther wrote:
...
As a rough first cut, vmstat 5 and watch the numbers ;-). iostat too, if you
can. If CPU isn't pegged at 100% and the disk isn't at full capacity, that's
an interesting result as it implies the box has spare capacity and there's
contention elsewhere - often lock
Also, I'd be curious about the big disparity between the 16MiB files
and the other 1MiB-32MiB files... It looks like all of them are
relatively consistent at the KiB/sec rates you show - but suddenly
there's a huge burst of speed on the 16MiB file (for httpd). So I'd
be really curious to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
All,
After reading some of your feedback, I've decided to make some changes:
- - Using TC 6.0.18 exclusively instead of 5.5
- - Using tcnative 1.1.16 instead of 1.1.12
- - Using httpd 2.2.11 instead of 2.2.10
- - Running tests for a certain amount
...@christopherschultz.net]
Sent: Monday, May 18, 2009 2:31 PM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: Apache httpd vs Tomcat static content performance [Revised/Updated]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
All,
After reading some of your feedback, I've decided to make some changes:
- - Using TC
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Robin,
On 5/18/2009 4:11 PM, Robin Wilson wrote:
Thanks! This information isn't useless... Of course, more detailed
results, after a longer test run would be more conclusive.
Yup, that's the plan. Tonight, I'll be running with an 8 minute test to
-
From: Christopher Schultz [mailto:ch...@christopherschultz.net]
Sent: Monday, May 18, 2009 3:25 PM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: Apache httpd vs Tomcat static content performance [Revised/Updated]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Robin,
On 5/18/2009 4:11 PM, Robin Wilson
www.KingsIsle.com
-Original Message-
From: Christopher Schultz [mailto:ch...@christopherschultz.net]
Sent: Monday, May 18, 2009 3:25 PM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: Apache httpd vs Tomcat static content performance
[Revised/Updated]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Robin
From: Robin Wilson [mailto:rwil...@kingsisle.com]
Subject: RE: Apache httpd vs Tomcat static content
performance[Revised/Updated]
I don't know if I'd call a 4% difference a dead heat...
Given the likely variability of any measurements taken in an 8-second run, even
10% or 15% would have
From: Christopher Schultz [mailto:ch...@christopherschultz.net]
Subject: Re: Apache httpd vs Tomcat static content performance
[Revised/Updated]
After reading some of your feedback, I've decided to make some changes:
- - Using TC 6.0.18 exclusively instead of 5.5
- - Using tcnative
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Chuck,
On 5/18/2009 4:40 PM, Caldarale, Charles R wrote:
From: Christopher Schultz [mailto:ch...@christopherschultz.net]
Subject: Re: Apache httpd vs Tomcat static content performance
[Revised/Updated]
After reading some of your feedback, I've
Chris, what do the numbers represent ?
You say you ran each test for 10 seconds, so I guess the numbers are not
the seconds it took, so what are they ?
I also wonder about the numbers, for example in the first column
(httpd). They seem to grow more or less lineraly as the file size
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
André,
On 5/18/2009 4:56 PM, André Warnier wrote:
You say you ran each test for 10 seconds, so I guess the numbers are not
the seconds it took, so what are they ?
They are transfer Rate (KiB/sec) as measured by ApacheBench.
I also wonder about
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Leon,
On 4/30/2009 6:32 PM, Leon Rosenberg wrote:
On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 9:58 PM, Christopher Schultz
If you need to serve static content (js, css etc) along with dynamic
content, you let tomcat handle it, it serves static content faster
than
On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 6:01 PM, Christopher Schultz
ch...@christopherschultz.net wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Amusingly enough, the way Tomcat serves static content as quickly as
httpd does is by... using the same code used by httpd.
no. unless you assume that http
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Leon,
On 5/1/2009 12:14 PM, Leon Rosenberg wrote:
On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 6:01 PM, Christopher Schultz
ch...@christopherschultz.net wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Amusingly enough, the way Tomcat serves static content as
On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 6:25 PM, Pid p...@pidster.com wrote:
Leon Rosenberg wrote:
On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 6:01 PM, Christopher Schultz
ch...@christopherschultz.net wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Amusingly enough, the way Tomcat serves static content as quickly as
your httpd and your tomcat server exist (ajp), and
the attacker can exploit it directly, since httpd will just send all
maped request 1 on 1.
A connection that allows only ajp would be, IMO, a filtered
connection, not an unfiltered one. Just because an attacker can break
into Apache httpd
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Joesph,
On 4/27/2009 5:41 PM, Joseph Millet wrote:
What's then common use where the two are required ?
I have one: you don't have a lot of money for hardware and so you aren't
buying BigIPs anytime soon. You have multiple Tomcats for whatever
is that more
complexity usually compromise security. Anyway an unfiltered
connection between your httpd and your tomcat server exist (ajp), and
the attacker can exploit it directly, since httpd will just send all
maped request 1 on 1.
A connection that allows only ajp would be, IMO, a filtered
unless you run
tomcat as root it cannot listen on port 80???
You can easyly redirect port 80 to the port tomcat is listening at.
Elmar
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands,
Robin Wilson wrote:
For the record, my answer was neither stupid or reflexive. I simply pointed
out why someone might want 2 layers of servers (httpd and tomcat). And
certainly, my rationale is both sound and arguable at the same time.
As for your assertion that 2 layers of security
Elmar Haneke wrote:
unless you run
tomcat as root it cannot listen on port 80???
You can easyly redirect port 80 to the port tomcat is listening at.
A better solution is to use JSVC. There are some issues with using
iptables to re-direct requests from port 80 to another port.
Elmar
Robin Wilson wrote:
As for your assertion that 2 layers of security is just complexity
and not more secure - you obviously haven't run many enterprise
production systems. Security in an enterprise system is all about
'layers' of protection. And sure, if they hack one layer - they are
probably
@tomcat.apache.org
Subject: Re: Why we need two servers (httpd and tomcat)
Robin Wilson wrote:
As for your assertion that 2 layers of security is just complexity
and not more secure - you obviously haven't run many enterprise
production systems. Security in an enterprise system is all
Subject: Re: Why we need two servers (httpd and tomcat)
Robin Wilson wrote:
As for your assertion that 2 layers of security is just complexity
and not more secure - you obviously haven't run many enterprise
production systems. Security in an enterprise system is all about
'layers
[mailto:geor...@mhsoftware.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2009 10:30
AM To: Tomcat Users List Subject: Re: Why we need two servers (httpd
and tomcat)
Robin Wilson wrote:
As for your assertion that 2 layers of security is just complexity
and not more secure - you obviously haven't run many
]
Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2009 10:30 AM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: Why we need two servers (httpd and tomcat)
Robin Wilson wrote:
As for your assertion that 2 layers of security is just complexity
and not more secure - you obviously haven't run many enterprise
production systems
Hello Group,
Can someone explain to me the basic difference between httpd and tomacat
serer. What one can do so the other can not do. And why do we need these
two servers in the first place.
I will appreciate this.
--
Thanks
Nagrik
1 - 100 of 183 matches
Mail list logo
