Hi, I've been trying to read all the threads relating to which connector is "best" to use HTTP (no SSL). I am planning to use Pound as an HTTP load balancer in front of Tomcat as I have no need for all the bells and whistles that Apache provides and Pound is fast and light.
>From what I've been reading through all the threads here is that the JIO connector is the oldest and the most stable. The APR connector is basically the same connector that is used in Apache httpd, so using the APR connector would, in theory, give me the same performance as though I was using httpd. Finally, the NIO is the latest addition to the Tomcat family that gives you the benefits of a fully java non-blocking connector, and should perform similarly to the APR connector for HTTP but be more sluggish on HTTPS. Addtionally, given that NIO is the most recent, it doesn't have as much "experience" as APR or JIO. That being said, I was leaning towards using the NIO connector for my installation. However, I was pretty surprised and shocked when reading "Tomcat - The Definitive Guide 2nd Edition" by Jason Brittain (O'Reilly Press), that the JIO was the fastest and most responsive when service small text files and 9k images. (http://books.google.ca/books?id=vJttHyVF0SUC&pg=PA148&lpg=PA148&dq=tomcat+nio+advantage&source=bl&ots=i_8ssSnNf3&sig=MWgnLmZquhONBLLc5ivHQ6F61_Y&hl=en&ei=vwiDSsLgLMeltge4ianFCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4#v=onepage&q=tomcat%20nio%20advantage&f=false pp.138-148). In fact, their published benchmarks should that the JIO was fastest, followed by APR, followed by NIO. Could that be attributed to configuration parameters for the individual connectors? That seems pretty contrary to everything I've read on this list to date. Can anyone shed some light on this descrepancy? Thanks! Eric --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tomcat.apache.org
