>Lots of people use sticky sessions to solve this problem. That doesn't >provide failover, but if you're not doing something extremely critical >where the user can just go elsewhere (ex: ecommerce) you might not >need failover.
With sticky sessions, in the event that one server crashed, the users on that box would have their sessions killed and would basically get kicked out of the app and rerouted to the other server, is that right? That doesnât sound that bad to me considering weâre talking about a very rare situation (assuming things are setup correctly). >Think about this for a minute. The application scope is in memory. So, >no, it's not going to automatically synchronize with the application >scope in memory on a different physical machine - even if you use >session replication. Very true. Thanks for helping me get my thinking cap on, as these are just issues I havenât had to mess w/ yet. With that said, assuming your service objects were singletons and didnât have any session specific data, I donât see why you couldnât just have the same objects repeated in the application scope on each machine. userService, productService, securityService, etc⦠and then simply pass the data into them as needed... i.e., userService.saveUser(stickyUser) or userService.getUserById(2401). Wouldnât this work fine? Thanks again for your insight, it is invaluable to me. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/message.cfm/messageid:357088 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-talk/unsubscribe.cfm
