Ian Holsman (Lists) wrote: > My only concern with the module is that it can't be used across servers. > So I am not sure how useful it would be non-trivial sites. with > stateless load balancing. (where the IP is not guaranteed to visit the > same machine for the next request) > > Have you given any thought of using memcache or something to share the > state across a farm so that it could be useful in those situations?
I never considered the server farm scenario when writing this module. I don't have such a server farm myself, and I wouldn't be able to handle the thorny issues involved in programming for such a scenario. A major goal of mine was to keep the module simple. Adding shared state or equivalent would make the module much more complicated. I have no objection if someone else does this work, but I can't do it myself. Even without shared state, one can still enforce crude limits by configuring a limit on each individual server. For example, if you are load balancing across five machines, and each machine has a limit of 2, then the farm as a whole has a limit of 10, which is not great, but still better than nothing (IMO anyway). If you have a million machines, then this won't work, but at that point you probably have enough money to solve this problem some other way. -David
