I would suspect that the controller builds a table much like a router's arp table which tracks source/destination addresses rather than mac addresses.
How BigIp would shift the load is dependant on how it is configured, what method of balancing traffic is being used and whether or not the session is sticky. For instance if you were load balancing https onto a couple servers for checkout where sessions needed to be sticky (once user starts check out the same server would be used until the transaction is committed) and another server was brought online no current users would move over to the new server. Instead new users would be pushed disproportionately to the new server until the load was balanced. If sessions aren't sticky like in a generic web server when another web server is brought online users could be moved from server to server. It all depends on how it is set up. And unlike nlbs one could use bigip to test application function inclusive of databases, thus load balancing an functional application (layer 7) rather than layer 5. John -----Original Message----- From: Joe Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 09, 2002 10:10 PM To: CF-Server Subject: RE: Clustercats vs. MS-NLBC John, My Question.. was how does F5 know ONE USER Session from the Other. Example USER JOHN has 5 minutes left in his session...on SERVER A. F5 somehow knows that SERVER A is OverLoaded... BUT how does F5 take USER JOHN and Put him on SERVER B and STILL show that USER John has only 5 minutes left in his session? I hope i am clear. Joe -----Original Message----- From: John Munyan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 12:03 AM To: CF-Server Subject: RE: Clustercats vs. MS-NLBC F5 can manage session state. I am not sure what you are asking. There is affinity whether the session is sticky or not, and on the one hand the algorithm to determine how it is dispersed e.g. round robin, least connections, smallest response time etc. Without a doubt F5 is the coolest, easiest to use load balancer out there. If the choice is ads with nlbs on 10 servers or 10 std server with 1 f5 box go for the f5. John -----Original Message----- From: Joe Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 09, 2002 8:41 PM To: CF-Server Subject: RE: Clustercats vs. MS-NLBC This is what i understand of F5... F5 transfers the users between servers depending on what F5 thinks(feedback from the servers in the pool) splitting the load to different servers... AND this DOES NOT IMPLY that when USER X is on SERVER A and Load is too much on SERVER A.. USER X's (Session STATE) gets tranferred to SERVER B without any loss of USER X's Session data While on SERVER A. Please correct me.. if i am wrong. Joe Certified Advanced ColdFusion Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----Original Message----- From: Chris White [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 09, 2002 8:16 PM To: CF-Server Subject: RE: Clustercats vs. MS-NLBC Another option would be to look at a hardware load balancer. I am using BigIP device by F5. www.f5.com It is easy to add a device to a pool. You may also have it monitor your sites, ect. Chris White -----Original Message----- From: Barry Moore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 09, 2002 7:06 PM To: CF-Server Subject: RE: Clustercats vs. MS-NLBC You could also look at Win2K server with CF-Pro and Microsoft Application Center 2000 to balance the load. -----Original Message----- From: John Munyan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, 10 September 2002 5:25 AM To: CF-Server Subject: RE: Clustercats vs. MS-NLBC 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
