I have to correct myself. It's a bit more complicated. It seems to be that the setup looses the session information from time to time.
The setup works OK, if there is only one worker. the session will never be lost. If two workers are present AND the users session is NOT bound to worker1, it will loose the the session and create a new. Strange also that worker2 will never be extended to the session ID. I only see "sessionID.worker1" and "sessionID". here is my workers.properties: worker.list=worker1,worker2,loadbalancer worker.worker1.port=8009 worker.worker1.host=localhost worker.worker1.type=ajp13 worker.worker1.lbfactor=50 worker.worker2.port=8009 worker.worker2.host=xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx worker.worker2.type=ajp13 worker.worker2.lbfactor=50 worker.loadbalancer.type=lb worker.loadbalancer.balanced_workers=worker2,worker1 worker.loadbalancer.sticky_session=1 hope anyone can help. thanks in advance. oh, Everything runs on Win2K Dual Processor machines. Maybe that's important. > -----Urspr�ngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Joachim M�ller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Gesendet: Freitag, 5. September 2003 20:11 > An: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Betreff: loadbalancing question (sticky session) > > > > Hi List. > > I am having a problem with loadbalancing. this is my setup: > > 1x Apache 2.0.47 with mod_jk > 2x Tomcat 4.1.x on seperate machines > 2x Jetspeed1.4b4 > > Everything is set up alright, so I can do load balancing. > The session will be extended by mod_jk to keep track > which session goes to which app server (SESSION_ID.worker1 or > SESSION_ID.worker2). > > The problem seems to be that the jetspeed tags truncate > the session id from the worker info. Even if the request > states SESSION_ID.worker1 the links produced by Jetspeed > contain only the SESSION_ID without the '.worker1' > > This must not happen, because if I switch from server1 to > server2 all session data is lost of course. > > Does anybody can help me out? > > Maybe it's a Tomcat issue defining the Session ID pattern? > > > Thanks in advance. > > Joachim >
