Am I correct to assume that if you're using a hardware loadbalancer,
then CF Enterprise is unnecessary?
Jim
-----Original Message-----
From: Jacob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Monday, September 11, 2000 3:30 PM
Subject: RE: CF Clustering
>That is what we do.
>
>Load Balance 10 webservers in WSD
>All servers run NT 4.0, SP5, Website Pro 2.5 and CF 4.0.1 Enterprise
>(nothing else)
>All servers have their content updated through a file sync program.
>Database is SQL 7.0, which also stores client variables.
>
>At 04:32 PM 9/11/00 -0400, you wrote:
>>Hello,
>>So using Radware WSD or BigIP, do you still need Enterprise Edition of
CF or
>>you can basically just hook up several Professional versions of CF
servers
>>to such a device especially if the user state is managed with client
>>variables in a centralized DB storage?
>>
>>Any comments appreciated..
>>
>>/pinkesh
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Jacob [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>>Sent: Monday, September 11, 2000 4:14 PM
>>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Subject: RE: CF Clustering
>>
>>
>>Radware's WSD (http://www.radware.com) does the same thing, but
better. I
>>have used both BigIP and WSD. Used WSD for almost 4 years. WSD is
1/2 the
>>price.
>>
>>At 05:47 PM 9/8/00 -0700, you wrote:
>> >We're buying a hardware solution called the BigIP
(http://www.bigip.com).
>> >It's a load balancing/failover solution with firewall capabilities.
It's
>> >spendy at 40K, but does exactly what we need.
>> >We'll be using the Win2k file replication.
>> >
>> >Cheers
>> >
>> >
>> >-----Original Message-----
>> >From: Jim McAtee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>> >Sent: Friday, September 08, 2000 4:41 PM
>> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >Subject: CF Clustering
>> >
>> >
>> >Does anyone have a link or pointer to information regarding how to
>> >cluster CF web servers? We're looking to upgrade our web and
database
>> >servers and I'd like to hear about the various approaches taken to
>> >clustering CF web servers.
>> >
>> >Ideally, I'd like to achieve load-balancing and failover via
redundancy.
>> >For our purposes the load-balancing doesn't have to be perfect, but
the
>> >failover must be automatic and transparent. I'm assuming we'd run
>> >several redundant web/CF servers connected to a common MS SQL
server.
>> >For the time being, I don't think we'd run a common fileserver for
the
>> >web site templates or other static content. Files would need to be
>> >replicated on all servers.
>> >
>> >With this configuration, I was wondering about things like the best
way
>> >to (1) achieve the load balancing (hardware and/or software needs?),
>> >considering that CF sessions need to be maintained (2) a good means
of
>> >replicating content accross servers (3) other considerations?
>> >
>> >Thanks for any input,
>> >Jim
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
'unsubscribe' in the body or visit the list page at www.houseoffusion.com
