Brantley Hobbs wrote:
Rainer,
Thanks for the reply! You're certainly right on the JK version.
Can you be more specific on the "add some more timeouts" comment? Do
you mean a higher number on connection_pool_timeout?
Have a look at connect_timeout and prepost_timeout. Usually I also use
reply_timeout, but this one not with a very low limit. You
connection_pool_timeout looks OK, you might want to increase it for
efficiency, but that's not critical.
Also, should the relationship between httpd's MaxClients and the
connector's maxThreads be 1:1 or what? The httpd server does do
additional work besides simply front-ending Tomcat, so I'd assume that
we'd want MaxClients to be at least the same as MaxThreads, and probably
much more depending on how much additional work the httpd server does.
Is this reasonable? I'm just trying to get a handle on the relationships.
You are exactly right. Usually the extra work done by Apache is high
concerning request counts (e.g. if Apache serves all the static
contents), but most of the extra work is done very quickly. So in case
you've got 1 Apache and 1 Tomcat, and Apache only serves additional
small static content, you can keep the numbers in sync.
If there is a n:1 or 1:n relationship (n>1), you might need to adjust.
If Apache serves long running downloads or scripts, you might also need
to give it more allowed parallelity than tomcat.
MaxThreads bigger than MaxClients is mostly the case, if you have 2
Apache, 2 Tomcat and each Apache can use both Tomcats. Then you would
choose MaxThreads close to 2*MaxClients, so that in case you need to
shut down one of your tomcats, the other one will still be able to
accept enough connections from both Apaches.
Thanks,
Brantley
Regards,
Rainer
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To start a new topic, e-mail: users@tomcat.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
