-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Tony,
On 10/7/2009 8:16 PM, Tony Anecito wrote: > I am using Apache Web server for the front end to serve my html > requests. Why? Tomcat can serve those requests quite well. > I have thought about using JBoss with it's Tomcat as the > front end Apache as the back end for handling ordinary http requests > but have not found anyone who has done that. That's because it would be silly to do that. Just use tcnative with "sendFile" enabled on your HTTP Connector: it's the same as "back-ending" (whatever that means) Tomcat with Apache httpd. > This is so I use the > standard port 80 for requests over the internet. Tomcat can use port 80 just fine. http://wiki.apache.org/tomcat/HowTo#How_to_run_Tomcat_without_root_priviledges.3F (Please ignore the misspelling of "privileges") > Web start does do keep-alive requests I believe so maybe that is > something to consider. Why would Java WebStart send keep-alive requests? Doesn't it just download a Java application and run it on the client side? Continued communication with the server just seems ... completely unnecessary. > My goal is to see if I can get response times over the lan under > 1msec using standard cheap hardware and open source software. How fast is your LAN? Using standard ping over a 802.11g network, I get response times around 3/4ms, and that's just to the TCP/IP stack and back. You are talking about adding HTTP protocol decoding, request delegation, and your webapp's code in under 1/4ms? That seems like a stretch unless your web application is pretty much doing nothing. > I am > close to my 1msec goal (measured at the client) and know if I upgrade > my old AMD64 5200+ I use for my server to say a Phenom II quad say a > 955 I might be able to pull it off. Ha ha ha. Yes, buying more hardware will (usually) improve your performance, but I suspect the network is the largest contributor to your observed latency, and you can only get Ethernet to go so fast. > Client PC: 4-5msec measured after message received from JAX-WS proxy > in code. Ha! You're running an XML web service on top of all this? If you are worried about performance, why did you bother with web services at all? ;) > Apache: logs 0 microsecond (running on windows so suspect 15msec > accuracy from timers even though microsecond resolution expected in > Apache logs) win32 timers are horrible: I wouldn't trust them to more than 1/2sec accuracy. > Tomcat: 20 microseconds response time measured at web service method > called by client. I am using cache at this tier. Again, if measuring on win32, you may be looking at timing lies. > For those results client/Apache/Tomcat(Jboss) are on same physical > PC. If I try from another client on lan I get the same response time > at the client. Thus routers/switches (1Gbps) are not noticable from > response time perspective right now. I disagree: if you are saying that localhost is as fast as a gigabit network, then the numbers you are seeing simply can't be right, especially when you're talking about the millisecond and microsecond level. I don't think we can really help you, other than to suggest that you switch to UDP, write your code in C, only use 32-bit little-endian data types, and use a binary protocol that amounts to memory dumping data using C data structures. XML web services... ha ha ha. - -chris -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkrNZRwACgkQ9CaO5/Lv0PAWiwCgw5ZGcg/FIR57mlMffy/We7hD /10AniPV+ZQkILGKkQdVZRKv/p1lrEb/ =IABV -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tomcat.apache.org
