We have been using F5's BigIP for the last 2 two years and quite happy with
it. (We have 4 production servers running CF). We have also tried nlbs but
BigIP is the clear winner. Dell resells BigIP bundling with its Powerapp
hardware, it is slightly cheaper than buying from F5. (at least it was 2
years ago)

Regards
Govind Bhat
Technology Manager
www.50plus.com

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2002 12:41 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: CF-Server-List V1 #92


CF-Server-List                 Wed, 11 Sep 2002           Volume 1 : Number
92

In this issue:

        RE: Clustercats vs. MS-NLBC
        RE: Clustercats vs. MS-NLBC
        CFMX on Linux/Apache2
        RE: CFMX on Linux/Apache2
        RE: CFMX on Linux/Apache2
        RE: CFMX on Linux/Apache2
        Re: CFMX on Linux/Apache2
        RE: CFMX on Linux/Apache2


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2002 01:10:29 -0400
From: "Joe Eugene" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: Clustercats vs. MS-NLBC
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

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.







______________________________________________________________________
This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The
place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting.

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2002 23:21:36 -0700
From: "John Munyan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: Clustercats vs. MS-NLBC
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

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

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2002 14:44:27 -0400
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David D Droddy)
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: CFMX on Linux/Apache2
Message-ID: <00db01c258fa$179479f0$8d880993@wclbuoy>

Are there any suggestions out there for help with CFMX on RH Linux w/
Apache2?

I'm finding CFMX VERY unstable on my production machine. It is going down
2-4 times every evening between 1 and 4am. I've tweaked everything I find in
the online help and tech-notes, but it's still a problem.

I'm running RHL 7.2, Apache 2.0.39 and CFMX.

Thanks

David Droddy

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2002 15:27:02 -0400
From: Jesse Noller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: CFMX on Linux/Apache2
Message-ID:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Uh... 

It only crashes during 1-4 PM?

Jesse Noller
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Macromedia Server Development
Unix/Linux "special guy" 

"But I neeeeed tacos! I need them or I will
explode! That happens to me sometimes!" -GIR

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 2:44 PM
> To: CF-Server
> Subject: CFMX on Linux/Apache2
> 
> Are there any suggestions out there for help with CFMX on RH Linux w/
> Apache2?
> 
> I'm finding CFMX VERY unstable on my production machine. It is going down
> 2-4 times every evening between 1 and 4am. I've tweaked everything I find
> in
> the online help and tech-notes, but it's still a problem.
> 
> I'm running RHL 7.2, Apache 2.0.39 and CFMX.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> David Droddy
> 
> 
> 
> 
______________________________________________________________________
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

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2002 21:17:36 +0100
From: "Colm Brazel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: CFMX on Linux/Apache2
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

You might try the MX livedocs as a link from http://www.cfblog.net/
early MX had lots of probs on Linux.

regards

Colm



Colm Brazel MA
CB Publications

www.cbweb.net <http://www.cbweb.net>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>




-----Original Message-----
From: David D Droddy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 10 September 2002 19:44
To: CF-Server
Subject: CFMX on Linux/Apache2


Are there any suggestions out there for help with CFMX on RH Linux w/
Apache2?

I'm finding CFMX VERY unstable on my production machine. It is going down
2-4 times every evening between 1 and 4am. I've tweaked everything I find in
the online help and tech-notes, but it's still a problem.

I'm running RHL 7.2, Apache 2.0.39 and CFMX.

Thanks

David Droddy




______________________________________________________________________
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2002 13:31:55 -0700
From: "Dylan Bromby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: CFMX on Linux/Apache2
Message-ID: <002601c25909$1af61db0$6501a8c0@rspc1>

I didn't realize there was a module for 2.0. Is it supported? We run MX
on Apache 1.3.26 and it runs great.


-----Original Message-----
From: David D Droddy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 11:44 AM
To: CF-Server
Subject: CFMX on Linux/Apache2


Are there any suggestions out there for help with CFMX on RH Linux w/
Apache2?

I'm finding CFMX VERY unstable on my production machine. It is going
down 2-4 times every evening between 1 and 4am. I've tweaked everything
I find in the online help and tech-notes, but it's still a problem.

I'm running RHL 7.2, Apache 2.0.39 and CFMX.

Thanks

David Droddy




______________________________________________________________________
Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide
more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2002 17:11:06 -0500
From: "Doug" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: CFMX on Linux/Apache2
Message-ID: <016f01c25917$0a917560$265b8b42@lake>

YIKES! I just received CFMX Server and I was intending on upgrading my Linux
server from CF 5.0 which is running really stable.

Guess I will hold off now.

================================
This address is filtered through the open relay database at
http://www.ordb.org
and is virus scanned by ANTIVIR
http://www.dwhite.ws
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
================================
----- Original Message -----
From: "David D Droddy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Server" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 1:44 PM
Subject: CFMX on Linux/Apache2


| Are there any suggestions out there for help with CFMX on RH Linux w/
| Apache2?
|
| I'm finding CFMX VERY unstable on my production machine. It is going down
| 2-4 times every evening between 1 and 4am. I've tweaked everything I find
in
| the online help and tech-notes, but it's still a problem.
|
| I'm running RHL 7.2, Apache 2.0.39 and CFMX.
|
| Thanks
|
| David Droddy
|
|
|
| 
______________________________________________________________________
This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The
place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2002 21:20:28 -0400 (EDT)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: CFMX on Linux/Apache2
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Apache 2.0.40 is not supported (yet), CFMX SP1 will take care of that.  
Apache 2.0.39 is only supported with the appropriate fix:

http://www.macromedia.com/v1/handlers/index.cfm?ID=23162

Remember to rebuild the connector after applying the fix.

~Todd

On Tue, 10 Sep 2002, Dylan Bromby wrote:

> I didn't realize there was a module for 2.0. Is it supported? We run MX
> on Apache 1.3.26 and it runs great.
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David D Droddy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 11:44 AM
> To: CF-Server
> Subject: CFMX on Linux/Apache2
> 
> 
> Are there any suggestions out there for help with CFMX on RH Linux w/
> Apache2?
> 
> I'm finding CFMX VERY unstable on my production machine. It is going
> down 2-4 times every evening between 1 and 4am. I've tweaked everything
> I find in the online help and tech-notes, but it's still a problem.
> 
> I'm running RHL 7.2, Apache 2.0.39 and CFMX.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> David Droddy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
______________________________________________________________________
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm

------------------------------

End of CF-Server-List V1 #92
****************************
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
'unsubscribe' in the body or visit the list page at www.houseoffusion.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 
'unsubscribe' in the body or visit the list page at www.houseoffusion.com

Reply via email to