Oh, by the way, do you have a recipe or a URL to a tutorial of Pylons using memcache?
Thanks againf On Apr 28, 2:27 am, "Shannon -jj Behrens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
