> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matt Sergeant [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, October 27, 2000 12:37 PM
> To: Tim Sweetman
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: ApacheCon report
>
>
> On Fri, 27 Oct 2000, Tim Sweetman wrote:
>
> > In no particular order, and splitting hairs some of the time...
> >
> > Sounded like mod_backhand was best used NOT in the same
> Apache as a phat
> > application server (eg. mod_perl), because you don't want
> memory-heavy
> > processes sitting waiting for responses. You'd be better off with a
> > separate switching machine - or serve your static content from
> > machine(s) that know to backhand dynamic requests to a phat
> machine. I
> > think hat's what Theo reckoned...
>
> Yes, but the backend mod_perl servers are running backhand.
> So you have:
>
> B B B B
> \ | | /
> \ \/ /
> \|/
> F
>
I was really impressed with backhand at Theo's presentation at ApacheCon US
in March. From what I rememeber though, it had serious limitations in the
SSL space. Did Theo touch on that? The converstation I had with him about
it back then was that it was going to be addressed in a future release...
also IIRC, backhand was only terribly useful behind something like BigIP
(which is what we use). Is there another implementation sheme now?
perhaps my memory is fading...
--Geoff
