https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44454
--- Comment #27 from Paul Martin <toutatis...@gmail.com> --- For anyone having this issue, you should know that mod_proxy can essentially be used as a functional replacement to mod_jk. While mod_proxy is theoretically less efficient than mod_jk, we found that the overhead added was minimal and of essentially no consequence as the apache-tomcat bridge was far from being the bottleneck. I had worked around this issue by moving to mod_proxy - if this avenue is available to you, it is worth exploring. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
