Robin Wilson wrote:
For the record, my answer was neither stupid or reflexive.
And for the record, I personally did not think it was either.
I agree with Leon when he says that some people just automatically put
an Apache in front of a Tomcat when they don't really need to, just by
habit or because they've found a configuration to copy, and without even
thinking about whether they really need it. Or maybe just because the
server comes that way pre-installed.
Then they add a
JkMount /* ajp13
;-)
Or they configure a load-balancer to balance one single back-end..
Or they set Apache's DocumentRoot to the Tomcat webapps directory, just
because it's easier and this way all the links work (usually in even
more ways than they expect).
On the other hand, I also believe, contrarily to Leon, that there are
plenty of practical cases where running some back-end Java applications
on a Tomcat server is necessary, but is not the main purpose of the
site, and thus having an Apache httpd in front comes in very handy or is
necessary. And provided you know what you're doing, the additional
overhead due to mod_jk is going to take 100 years to overtake the cost
of two days of trying to figure out how to do the same in Tomcat.
It also depends very much on the skills at hand. Given a certain
problem, the "right" solution will be different depending on whether you
have a staff of mostly java-oriented people, or not.
So this was not a flame, just an attempt at restoring some balance which
I felt was a bit upset by Leon's diatribe.
Thus, to the original poster : I believe that by now you should have a
relative balance of arguments allowing you to decide when one needs only
Apache httpd, only Tomcat, or a combination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tomcat.apache.org