On 06.06.2009 01:35, Jason Joseph wrote: > > Rainer Jung wrote: >>> JkOptions +FlushHeader +FlushPackets >>> >> >> in order to make the flush also effective for httpd. >> >> > Just realized I didn't disable caching before I did that last test, > heres the image with caching disabled. > > http://207.7.102.90/~thecorp/apache-ajp-withflush-nocache.jpg > > Its 2 seconds slower than tomcat but its definitely loading files > concurrently as it should. Any ideas why the static files are taking so > much longer than with tomcat?
The difference is obviously how the bunch of pictures is handled, that were retrieved close to the end. Those images - I suppose - are static content. They are very small. So needing 2 seconds to serve such an image is much to long. - Check retrieving the images without the rest of the page and confirm, that as single requests they need much less than a second in both scenarios. If yes, recheck, whether the bad behavour for retrieving the full page is stable (always bad, turn trace logging off!). If so, retrieve again with trace on, so that you can check where the long response times are happening from the point of view of Apache (between browser and Apache, Apache and Tomcat, sending data back, ...). Note: You added a time stamp format configuration for mod_jk to your httpd configuration. Remove it. Without it you would get millisecond time resolution in the JK log file, with your hard coded time format you only get seconds resolution. Regards, Rainer --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tomcat.apache.org
