On 4/27/07, Cliff Wells <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, 2007-04-27 at 16:50 -0700, Shannon -jj Behrens wrote: > > > It's the same as everything else. You can add more Web servers. If > > you use sessions, you'll need to either a) use session stickiness > > (ugly) > > Out of curiosity, how is this ugly? This should be mostly handled > transparently by the proxy (i.e. sends same sessions to same backend).
If one Web server dies, all the users using that Web server lose their sessions. That sucks. It also limits the effectiveness of the load balancer. It can only redistribute *new* users instead of each new request. > > or b) use a session server (less ugly). > > And what do you recommend for this? If I had to make the decision today, I'd probably use memcache. > I've not seen this approach, so I'm > curious (or maybe the proxy acts as a session server, so we're talking > about the same thing?). What do you mean the proxy acts as a session server? I don't know of any load balancers who can act as session servers. By the way, this topic is covered nicely in "Scalable Internet Architectures" and "Building Scalable Web Sites". (weird, de ja vu ;) Happy Hacking! -jj -- http://jjinux.blogspot.com/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pylons-discuss" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
