"Caldarale, Charles R" <chuck.caldar...@unisys.com> wrote in message news:0aae5ab84b013e45a7b61cb66943c17228f1795...@usea-exch7.na.uis.unisys.com... >> From: johnrock [mailto:johnpi...@yahoo.com] >> Subject: Re: Apache Portable Runtime ? >> >> Given that, is it still a preferred idea to install APR? > >Your best bet is to measure the performance of your webapp with and without >APR. Since you're not using SSL and >have limited static content, I >suspect you won't see much of a difference. >
I agree with Chuck. The performance of APR against the other connectors varies a lot depending on the OS (e.g. last time I saw numbers, which was a while ago, APR for dynamic content was slower on Windows). If you don't expect to be handling a lot of concurrent connections with HTTP only than APR doesn't offer a lot of benifits. >> Is installing the APR considered a 'must do' for anyone >> looking to maximize the performance of Tomcat in production? >> Or is this something in the category of 'not neccessary/ >> adviseable unless you need it'? > >I'd put it in the latter category, unless you measure a noticeable >throughput gain with it. Including APR does reduce portability, since >you'll need a different native library for each platform, including just >going from a 32- to 64-bit JVM. > >- Chuck THIS COMMUNICATION MAY CONTAIN CONFIDENTIAL AND/OR OTHERWISE PROPRIETARY MATERIAL and is thus for use only by the intended recipient. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the e-mail and its attachments from all computers. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tomcat.apache.org
