Misagh,

Thank you for the comments.  I believe one of our options might be to
simply stop replicating the tickets since we are using primary/failover
setup (even with a 3rd server introduced).  As you said the only caveat I
can think of is that users would lose their sessions.

Is there a reason to replication service tickets in a primary/failover
setup?  I assume that since the switch to the failover sever would take ~30
seconds anyway it would not do any good.  In this case someone logging in
during the switchover would receive an error.

Adam

On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 3:13 PM, Misagh Moayyed <[email protected]> wrote:

> If you move away from RDBMS-backed ticket registries and onto those that
> are cache-based, there are multiple options you could choose. While EhCache
> could still be successful with RMI replication, we have also had good
> success with Hazelcast:
>
>
> https://github.com/Unicon/cas-addons/wiki/Configuring-HazelcastTicketRegistry
>
>
>
> …which in some ways is to replace Ehcache for distributed data transfer.
> Our experience has been that troubleshooting RMI can be very very tricky,
> should you run into an issue with the network and/or firewall.
>
>
>
> EhCache and the like work best for active/active deployments as tickets
> are cached and distributed to all nodes. So you can certainly have your
> load balancer keep all nodes in the loop.
>
> If you choose to decide in favor of a primary/failover setup, then
> probably the default ticket registry based on node-memory would suffice.
> There is of course the caveat of losing the SSO state when the failover
> node takes over (because tickets are not distributed) but I think that’s a
> consequence most folks tend to live with, in our experience at least. The
> annoyance mostly comes to down to the fact that you’d have to ask the user
> to re-authenticate once more.
>
>
>
> We took some time to document some of these concerns here:
>
> http://jasig.github.io/cas/4.0.0/planning/High-Availability-Guide.html
>
>
>
> Note the docs mostly is on and for CAS 4, but I think the points made
> stilly to any HA deployment.
>
>
>
> HTH.
>
>
>
> *From:* Adam Causey [mailto:[email protected]]
> *Sent:* Monday, October 6, 2014 11:16 AM
> *To:* [email protected]
> *Subject:* [cas-user] Preferred HA clustering support
>
>
>
> Hello,
>
>
>
> Currently we have a customized setup of HA clustering of CAS 3.5.2 which
> involves two servers (one primary, one failover) with a mySQL master-master
> replication.  The database caches ticket-granting tickets in case of
> failover to the 2nd server.
>
>
>
> We've had multiple issues with the master-master replication, and we are
> also planning to introduce a 3rd server in the cloud.
>
>
>
> Is the EhcacheTicketRegistery still the best method for clustering
> multiple servers?  We will have to use RMI since multicasting is not an
> option in AWS.
>
>
>
> If we use the EhcacheTicketRegistery, can we switch to a load balanced
> setup instead of having a primary/failover setup?
>
>
>
> Thank you,
>
>
>
> Adam Causey
> Virginia Commonwealth University
>
>
>
> --
>
> You are currently subscribed to [email protected] as: 
> [email protected]
>
> To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see 
> http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/cas-user
>
>
> --
> You are currently subscribed to [email protected] as: [email protected]
> To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see 
> http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/cas-user
>
>

-- 
You are currently subscribed to [email protected] as: 
[email protected]
To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see 
http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/cas-user

Reply via email to