On Fri, 27 Oct 2000, Tim Bunce wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 26, 2000 at 08:47:20PM +0100, Matt Sergeant wrote:
> > On Tue, 24 Oct 2000, Jeff Horn wrote:
> >
> > > However, I am also aware of a _major_ ISP that implements their email
> > > system using a _major_ RDBMS that has had problems that are best
> > > solved via connection pooling. Essentially, the time it takes them to
> > > search through all the cached connections is nearly as long as the
> > > time it is taking to read/write to the database. Although, I'm not
> > > implementing email as this ISP is, I think that scalability in my case
> > > may definitely run into similar roadblocks.
> > >
> > > I am interested in hearing from anyone that has tried to implement
> > > true connection pooling either within Apache or as an external
> > > process. I'm particularly interested in hearing about implementations
> > > that could be made to work or are done using Perl and DBI/DBD. I am
> > > mostly interested in things that are Open Source or licensed like Perl
> > > itself.
> >
> > Having just returned from ApacheCon, I can honestly recommend looking at
> > mod_backhand to simply have a few servers that run the DBI pool, and have
> > database intensive requests go to those servers. It is a *very* cool
> > solution to just these sorts of scalability problems.
>
> To redirect incoming url's that require database work to mod_perl 'heavy'
> servers? Just like a smarter and more dynamic mod_rewrite? Yes?
Yes basically, except its not a redirect. mod_backhand can use keep-alives
to ensure that it never has to recreate a new connection to the heavy
backend servers, unlike mod_rewrite or mod_proxy. And it can do it in a
smart way so that remote connections don't use keepalives (because they
are evil for mod_perl servers - see the mod_perl guide), but backhand
connections do. Very very cool technology.
> Or, here's an odd thought that just crossed my mind...
>
> You could have a set of apache servers that are 'pure' DBI proxy servers.
> That is, they POST requests containing SQL (for prepare_cached) plus
> bind parameter values and return responses containing the results.
>
> Basically I'm proposing that apache be used as an alternative framework for
> DBI::ProxyServer. Almost all the marshaling code and higher level logic
> is already in DBI::ProxyServer and DBD::Proxy. Shouldn't be too hard to do
> and you'd gain in all sorts of ways.
>
> Anyone fancy having a go? Let me know so we can discuss it in more detail.
Sounds like just a CORBA/RPC type thing. Wouldn't you be better off using
CORBA::ORBit?
--
<Matt/>
/|| ** Director and CTO **
//|| ** AxKit.com Ltd ** ** XML Application Serving **
// || ** http://axkit.org ** ** XSLT, XPathScript, XSP **
// \\| // ** Personal Web Site: http://sergeant.org/ **
\\//
//\\
// \\
