Re: Load testing with Tomcat 5.5, Apache 2.2 and mod_proxy_ajp

Ian Shafer wrote: Hello, I have this line in my httpd.conf file: ProxyPass /webapp/ ajp://localhost:8009/webapp/ min=256 max=256 and in tomcat I have maxThreads set to 256 for both my HTTP connector and my AJP connector. For some reason, though, I still get a message in my tomcat log saying

Load testing with Tomcat 5.5, Apache 2.2 and mod_proxy_ajp

Hello, I'm currently load testing a webapp running on Tomcat 5.5 that is fronted by Apache 2.2 and uses mod_proxy_ajp to communicate between the two. I'm seeing some odd behavior that I cannot explain. I have this line in my httpd.conf file: ProxyPass /webapp/ ajp://localhost:8009/webapp/

Re: Apache 2.2 and mod_proxy_ajp performance

On Mon, 2006-02-13 at 00:37 -0800, Ian Shafer wrote: > What do I need to look out for in getting this to perform better? I > tried the max=XXX configuration at the end of my ProxyPass line, but > that didn't help. Any thoughts? What about your Apache keepalivetimeout? Shorter timeout should fr

Apache 2.2 and mod_proxy_ajp performance

Hello, I just started using Apache 2.2 and mod_proxy_ajp with Tomcat 5.0.28 on OS X 10.4.4. I'm doing some load testing on this configuration and am getting some pretty dismal results. My load test consists of 10 clients each sending about 150 HTTP GETs for images that are about 6K

Re: Apache 2.2 and mod_proxy_ajp

"Chris Lear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >* Jess Holle wrote (02/12/05 13:53): >> I have some vague recollection that performance of mod_proxy_ajp tested >> just /slightly /better than mod_jk. > > But where is the information on this? > You can search the [EMAIL P

Re: Apache 2.2 and mod_proxy_ajp

Chris Lear wrote: * Jess Holle wrote (02/12/05 13:53): I have some vague recollection that performance of mod_proxy_ajp tested just /slightly /better than mod_jk. But where is the information on this? It should be in Apache 2.2's doc set, but it would not surprise me at all if this

Re: Apache 2.2 and mod_proxy_ajp

* Jess Holle wrote (02/12/05 13:53): > I have some vague recollection that performance of mod_proxy_ajp tested > just /slightly /better than mod_jk. But where is the information on this? I joined this list a few days ago after Googling like crazy for information on the most sensible and supporte

Re: Apache 2.2 and mod_proxy_ajp

I have some vague recollection that performance of mod_proxy_ajp tested just /slightly /better than mod_jk. Tim Funk wrote: Performance (IIRC while reading on the mailing lists) is about the same. mod_proxy_ajp should be easier to configure and install since it comes bundled with apache and i

Re: Apache 2.2 and mod_proxy_ajp

Performance (IIRC while reading on the mailing lists) is about the same. mod_proxy_ajp should be easier to configure and install since it comes bundled with apache and it should be much easier to install than jk. e wrote: Hi, I'm happy to see Apache 2.2 has been released. I'm curious if any

Apache 2.2 and mod_proxy_ajp

Hi, I'm happy to see Apache 2.2 has been released. I'm curious if anyone has any insights into the performance of mod_proxy_ajp vs mod_jk? Is it more efficient, or just easier to configure? Are there any sample configurations available to look at? Thanks, E