On 03/12/2012 02:08 AM, Konstantin Preißer wrote:
Hello Tomcat developers,
Advantages:
- Easier to maintain. I have looked a bit at the ISAPI code, and as it is C++
code, it is probably somewhat hard to maintain. As I said, for this connector
(in the current stage) I only spend one day to read the AJP documentation and
to program the module, so it is probably very easy to write a AJP connector
this way. :)
- Easier to install (you don't have to setup virtual directories etc).
I would rather see SPDY connector over AJP.
AJP has serious limitations, and recently we discussed using SPDY for
server-to-server communication.
Disadvantages:
-Probably worse Performance. Although I haven't done any performance tests (and
when testing with a normal browser, I didn't notice any performance slowdown),
such a managed connector probably has a bit worse performance compared to the
ISAPI connector. (However, the current implementation also doesn't use an AJP
Connection pool; and you would need to precompile the C# code to a .dll file
for optimal performance).
Well, you have a very optimistic list here ;)
Think that the performance is of least concern.
Please let me know what you think about it. I won't be disappointed if you
aren't interested in it or if there's no requirement for such a connector, but
I'm happy for any feedback, and I would also be willing to give the code,
licences etc. to the Apache software foundation, if that's possible.
Like said. Not sure if the AJP protocol is the right direction.
The current connector does the job and exploits the AJP protocol to its
maximum and I see no purpose for another AJP connector.
Sure install might be simpler, but only if you don't
count differences in .NET each IIS requires so hardly binary portable like
isapi_redirector which can basically run on any IIS for XP up.
Regards
--
^TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
