Re: Systems Architecture Pros and Cons

And you did :-) I'm sorry if my reply sounded grumpy (did it?). I guess I misinterpreted your intention for open discussion. No wasn't grumpy I was a little frustrated as the discussion had gone off the bat from the beginning :( The reason why I said two TCs is, well, it would be nice to h

Re: Systems Architecture Pros and Cons

If you measure the resource util on the apache boxes while under load, you may find that you can get by with A single apache instance and 4 tomcat instances (each on it's own box). You may be able to but you lose the ability to load balance across the Apache instances for high-availability.

RE: Systems Architecture Pros and Cons

> -Original Message- > From: Peter Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 13 October 2005 10:03 > To: Tomcat Users List > Subject: Re: Systems Architecture Pros and Cons > > > It will depend a great deal on the nature of your application and how > > ma

RE: Systems Architecture Pros and Cons

es to every cluster members? This tool would be accessible with a Web browser. Thank you. Philippe Waltregny-Dengis -Original Message- From: Peter Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2005 11:59 AM To: Tomcat Users List Subject: Re: Systems Architecture Pros and

Re: Systems Architecture Pros and Cons

Personally - I prefer the 2 apache + 3 tomcat approach. With 2 apache's you have your needed redundancy. The apaches can also be used to use the many modules for decorating any requests. (Such as mod_headers to add selectively add cache-control headers) Since the tomcats will probably need mo

Re: Systems Architecture Pros and Cons

Peter Johnson wrote: Nix, I am fully aware of all of this (regarding security permissions etc) ... I am not trying to solve a problem but rather open a discussion with the community on how people prefer to structure their systems. Some run only Tomcat, some run multiple servers with Apache an

Re: Systems Architecture Pros and Cons

Nix, I am fully aware of all of this (regarding security permissions etc) ... I am not trying to solve a problem but rather open a discussion with the community on how people prefer to structure their systems. Some run only Tomcat, some run multiple servers with Apache and Tomcat, some tier the

Re: Systems Architecture Pros and Cons

Peter Johnson wrote: It is possible for Apache to be compromised without Tomcat being compromised e.g. an overflow in Apache. So if Apache (or other service on the front box) is compromised and the systems are tiered then the intruder can only impersonate local actions. If all tiers reside on

Re: Systems Architecture Pros and Cons

Let's just say there are complex rewrite rules and funky virtual hosting happening with some requests being proxied through to Tomcat. Yes yes mod_jk or mod_jk2 should be being used however apparently when they were originally testing the connectors they found them to continually fall over afte

Re: Systems Architecture Pros and Cons

It will depend a great deal on the nature of your application and how many end users you think you may have. Also, how will you manage your storage/database (internal to the 5 boxes, external array, two extra boxes on fail-over etc)? Is your application read heavy or write heavy? Why? This dis

Re: Systems Architecture Pros and Cons

Then Option 1. But just out of the interest, what do you need the apache for? And if you do, why don't you separate your "i-need-an-apache-to-manage-this" webfarm, from your "java-web-app+static+content" webfarm? leon On 10/13/05, Peter Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Leon Rosenberg wrot

Re: Systems Architecture Pros and Cons

It is possible for Apache to be compromised without Tomcat being compromised e.g. an overflow in Apache. So if Apache (or other service on the front box) is compromised and the systems are tiered then the intruder can only impersonate local actions. If all tiers reside on the same server then b

Re: Systems Architecture Pros and Cons

Leon Rosenberg wrote: Option 3. All 5 run tomcats. What do you need apache for? I thought this might be a response hence the comment "assuming that both Apache and Tomcat are used" Apache is utilised heavily and removing it isn't an option.

RE: Systems Architecture Pros and Cons

> Hi All, > > I was discussing with someone two common system architectures for a web > application environment and thought I'd extend it to the Tomcat > community to see their views / thoughts. > > If we consider that there are 5 servers available, what is the best way > to utilise them assuming

Re: Systems Architecture Pros and Cons

On 10/13/05, Peter Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Pro: - enhanced security due to tiers Why? If tomcat has a security hole, putting an apache in front of it, wouldn't change anything, since the security hole would be as exposed as with standalone tomcat. leon --

Re: Systems Architecture Pros and Cons

Option 3. All 5 run tomcats. What do you need apache for? On 10/13/05, Peter Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi All, > > I was discussing with someone two common system architectures for a web > application environment and thought I'd extend it to the Tomcat > community to see their views / t

Re: Systems Architecture Pros and Cons

Peter Johnson wrote: Hi All, I was discussing with someone two common system architectures for a web application environment and thought I'd extend it to the Tomcat community to see their views / thoughts. If we consider that there are 5 servers available, what is the best way to utilise t