This is a discussion on Defining a named worker with mod_jk2 within the Linux Web Servers forums, part of the Web Server and Related Forums category; With mod_jk I did this in workers.properties to define a worker called foo: worker.list=other_workers, foo worker.foo....
|
|||||||
| FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
|||
|
With mod_jk I did this in workers.properties to define a worker called
foo: worker.list=other_workers, foo worker.foo.port=8888 worker.foo.host=127.0.0.1 worker.foo.type=ajp13 How to do the equivalent thing in workers2.properties for mod_jk2? (I could figure out workers.properties without docs but it appears workers2.properties is too weird even with docs.) -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen@iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/ Mozilla Web Author FAQ: http://mozilla.org/docs/web-developer/faq.html |
|
|||
|
Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi> said:
>With mod_jk I did this in workers.properties to define a worker called >foo: .... >How to do the equivalent thing in workers2.properties for mod_jk2? No help for this, except to point out that development of mod_jk2 has been frozen, and efforts are again directed to mod_jk. So, unless you have some specific reason to use mod_jk2, just revert back to mod_jk. -- Wolf a.k.a. Juha Laiho Espoo, Finland (GC 3.0) GIT d- s+: a C++ ULSH++++$ P++@ L+++ E- W+$@ N++ !K w !O !M V PS(+) PE Y+ PGP(+) t- 5 !X R !tv b+ !DI D G e+ h---- r+++ y++++ "...cancel my subscription to the resurrection!" (Jim Morrison) |
|
|||
|
In article <dektfs$36s$1@ichaos.ichaos-int>,
Juha Laiho <Juha.Laiho@iki.fi> wrote: > So, > unless you have some specific reason to use mod_jk2, just revert > back to mod_jk. Choosing mod_jk over mod_jk2 is not in my bargaining power in this case. Does mod_jk work with Apache 2.x? -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen@iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/ Mozilla Web Author FAQ: http://mozilla.org/docs/web-developer/faq.html |
|
|||
|
Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi> said:
>In article <dektfs$36s$1@ichaos.ichaos-int>, > Juha Laiho <Juha.Laiho@iki.fi> wrote: > >> So, >> unless you have some specific reason to use mod_jk2, just revert >> back to mod_jk. > >Choosing mod_jk over mod_jk2 is not in my bargaining power in this case. >Does mod_jk work with Apache 2.x? I have stil been keeping with Apache 1.3.x, so no first-hand experience there -- Google references indicate strongly that mod_jk would work with Apache2. Also, reading the latest Tomcat docs for a first time in a while, there is a mention of using Apache2 with mod_proxy (apparently a separate add-on for pre-2.2 Apache versions) with AJP protocol support enabled. So looks like mod_proxy is extended to also handle Tomcat connectivity. -- Wolf a.k.a. Juha Laiho Espoo, Finland (GC 3.0) GIT d- s+: a C++ ULSH++++$ P++@ L+++ E- W+$@ N++ !K w !O !M V PS(+) PE Y+ PGP(+) t- 5 !X R !tv b+ !DI D G e+ h---- r+++ y++++ "...cancel my subscription to the resurrection!" (Jim Morrison) |