Varnish + Tomcat vs Apache + mod_cache + mod_jk +Tomcat

[Dridi Boukelmoune]

Hi Adrian,

Sorry I missed your previous mail. I don't use ServerFault,
StackOverflow and the likes, only anonymously when it shows up in my
search results. Feel free to reuse my answer on ServerFault, I'm glad
it helped you :)

Cheers,
Dridi

On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 6:31 PM, Adrian Ber <beradrian at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hi Dridi,
>
> If you post your answer on ServerFault, I want to accept it.
>
> Thanks,
> Adrian.
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, 16 October 2013, 12:06, Adrian Ber <beradrian at yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> Definitely VCL is easier to use than Apache config. And Varnish/Apache and
> Tomcat will be sitting on the same (cloud) machine.
> Then practically I would be interested in a comparison of the overhead added
> by Apache vs Varnish in terms of non-cached requests.
>
> Thanks,
> Adrian.
>
>
> On Wednesday, 16 October 2013, 11:54, Dridi Boukelmoune
> <dridi.boukelmoune at zenika.com> wrote:
>
> 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
>
>
>
>