If you are considering the use of nlbs remember it isn't layer 7 aware meaning nlbs cares not if your application is throwing 501's all over the place. Just something to be aware of. If you have a couple thousand dollars to spend you might consider using a hardware loadbalancer if you want something robust. Plus if you go with a hardware loadbalancer you can go with regular server rather than ads and save some money. That is what I would recommend.
John -----Original Message----- From: Glenn Cross [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 09, 2002 11:39 AM To: CF-Server Subject: Clustercats vs. MS-NLBC I posted over on CFDJ-List and was advised this would be a good place to try as well. I'm new to this list so here goes. I'm looking to setup a 2-node cluster, just for the sake of failover/redundancy. This has nothing to do with server load as this is an intranet and doesn't see tremendous activity, but on the other hand it is critical to not have it down for any significant length of time. With that said, is there a consensus of opinion regarding the use of ClusterCats versus Microsoft's Network Load Balancing Cluster (NLBC) in the Win2K Advanced Server product? It seems that either of these will do what I want and it seems that both will attempt to maintain session state of session memory variables. Any recommendations, opinions, thoughts, or real-life horror stories that would favor one over the other? Thanks. ______________________________________________________________________ Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body or visit the list page at www.houseoffusion.com
