Varnish + Tomcat vs Apache + mod_cache + mod_jk +Tomcat

[Dridi Boukelmoune]

Hi,

I have no data to show, but since I use all three tools, I can give
you my two cents :)

Varnish + Tomcat is definitely the simplest architecture, because it
does not involve AJP. I would also consider changing the default
(blocking) http connector on the Tomcat side and measuring performance
improvements (non blocking, native...). I'm also a big fan of the VCL
which feels a lot more natural than httpd's configuration to me.

As I trust Varnish not to be the bottleneck, I am not keen on adding a
new indirection (httpd) for a binary protocol that is not relevant to
me anymore. I believe (still no data) having a 10Gb/s connection
between Varnish and Tomcat (I assume they're not sitting too far from
each other) outperforms the compactness of AJP (serialization
involved).

Best Regards,
Dridi

On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 10:54 AM, Adrian Ber <beradrian at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Does anyone have some comparison data in terms of performance for using in
> front of Tomcat either Varnish or Apache with mod_jk. I know that AJ
> connector suppose to be faster than HTTP, but I was thinking that in
> combination Varnish which is lighter and highly optimized could perform
> better. There is also the discussion between static resources (which I think
> will perform faster with Varnish than Apache, even with mod_cache) and
> dynamic pages.
> I asked this question on ServerFault too
> http://serverfault.com/questions/545793/varnish-tomcat-vs-apache-mod-jk-tomcat
> Which configuration would be advisable Varnish + Tomcat or Apache +
> mod_cache + mod_jk +Tomcat?
>
> Thanks,
> Adrian Ber.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> varnish-misc mailing list
> varnish-misc at varnish-cache.org
> https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc