Re: [Resin-interest] session persistence - JDBC vs cluster.
Thanks Scott. Scott Ferguson wrote: > > > On Nov 14, 2008, at 12:02 AM, YoKay wrote: > >> >> I have a question: >> >> Is cluster-store/tcp-store only available in resin 3.x pro version ? > > Correct. > >> I think for 2.1.7 it was allowed in non pro version. > > I believe that was true. 2.1 split the pro/non-pro by APIs, while 3.x > splits by clustering/performance/reliability, but includes all the > APIs in the non-pro. > > -- Scott > >> >> >> It would be very nice if some one can clarify. >> >> Thanks. >> >> >> Scott Ferguson wrote: >>> >>> >>> On Mar 17, 2008, at 10:15 AM, Chad Cannell wrote: >>> What is the difference between tcp-store and cluster-store? >>> >>> They're the same. cluster-store is the newer name. tcp-store is >>> just >>> for backward compatibility. >>> >>> If you turn on "finer" logging, you should see the size of the >>> session >>> getting stored. >>> >>> -- Scott >>> c On Fri, 2008-03-14 at 15:18 -0400, Chad Cannell wrote: > We currently have a Resin cluster of 25 nodes, configured to use > JDBC > persistence. We typically have around 140,000 active sessions. > > I am considering moving to cluster store persistence. We have been > running on a single MySQL database. I have started to look into > clustring it and thoght maybe cluster store would be better. > > Our app doesn't use the session for anything other than login state > and > the cluster simply provides SSO and LB. > > How would I go about determining what memory consumption our > sessions > would add to each node's JVM? Is there any documentation that would > show > how much memory 1 session would take in it's basic form? I could > then > extrapilate that out to our load. > > Any perf gain/loss by going to cluster store? > > My goal is better HA of session data and no performance > degradation. > > -3 > > > ___ > resin-interest mailing list > resin-interest@caucho.com > http://maillist.caucho.com/mailman/listinfo/resin-interest > > ___ resin-interest mailing list resin-interest@caucho.com http://maillist.caucho.com/mailman/listinfo/resin-interest >>> >>> >>> >>> ___ >>> resin-interest mailing list >>> resin-interest@caucho.com >>> http://maillist.caucho.com/mailman/listinfo/resin-interest >>> >>> >> >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://www.nabble.com/session-persistence---JDBC-vs-cluster.-tp16058626p20496225.html >> Sent from the Resin mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> >> >> >> ___ >> resin-interest mailing list >> resin-interest@caucho.com >> http://maillist.caucho.com/mailman/listinfo/resin-interest > > > > ___ > resin-interest mailing list > resin-interest@caucho.com > http://maillist.caucho.com/mailman/listinfo/resin-interest > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/session-persistence---JDBC-vs-cluster.-tp16058626p20535009.html Sent from the Resin mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ resin-interest mailing list resin-interest@caucho.com http://maillist.caucho.com/mailman/listinfo/resin-interest
Re: [Resin-interest] session persistence - JDBC vs cluster.
On Nov 14, 2008, at 12:02 AM, YoKay wrote: > > I have a question: > > Is cluster-store/tcp-store only available in resin 3.x pro version ? Correct. > I think for 2.1.7 it was allowed in non pro version. I believe that was true. 2.1 split the pro/non-pro by APIs, while 3.x splits by clustering/performance/reliability, but includes all the APIs in the non-pro. -- Scott > > > It would be very nice if some one can clarify. > > Thanks. > > > Scott Ferguson wrote: >> >> >> On Mar 17, 2008, at 10:15 AM, Chad Cannell wrote: >> >>> What is the difference between tcp-store and cluster-store? >> >> They're the same. cluster-store is the newer name. tcp-store is >> just >> for backward compatibility. >> >> If you turn on "finer" logging, you should see the size of the >> session >> getting stored. >> >> -- Scott >> >>> >>> >>> c >>> >>> On Fri, 2008-03-14 at 15:18 -0400, Chad Cannell wrote: We currently have a Resin cluster of 25 nodes, configured to use JDBC persistence. We typically have around 140,000 active sessions. I am considering moving to cluster store persistence. We have been running on a single MySQL database. I have started to look into clustring it and thoght maybe cluster store would be better. Our app doesn't use the session for anything other than login state and the cluster simply provides SSO and LB. How would I go about determining what memory consumption our sessions would add to each node's JVM? Is there any documentation that would show how much memory 1 session would take in it's basic form? I could then extrapilate that out to our load. Any perf gain/loss by going to cluster store? My goal is better HA of session data and no performance degradation. -3 ___ resin-interest mailing list resin-interest@caucho.com http://maillist.caucho.com/mailman/listinfo/resin-interest >>> >>> >>> ___ >>> resin-interest mailing list >>> resin-interest@caucho.com >>> http://maillist.caucho.com/mailman/listinfo/resin-interest >> >> >> >> ___ >> resin-interest mailing list >> resin-interest@caucho.com >> http://maillist.caucho.com/mailman/listinfo/resin-interest >> >> > > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/session-persistence---JDBC-vs-cluster.-tp16058626p20496225.html > Sent from the Resin mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > > ___ > resin-interest mailing list > resin-interest@caucho.com > http://maillist.caucho.com/mailman/listinfo/resin-interest ___ resin-interest mailing list resin-interest@caucho.com http://maillist.caucho.com/mailman/listinfo/resin-interest
Re: [Resin-interest] session persistence - JDBC vs cluster.
I have a question: Is cluster-store/tcp-store only available in resin 3.x pro version ? I think for 2.1.7 it was allowed in non pro version. It would be very nice if some one can clarify. Thanks. Scott Ferguson wrote: > > > On Mar 17, 2008, at 10:15 AM, Chad Cannell wrote: > >> What is the difference between tcp-store and cluster-store? > > They're the same. cluster-store is the newer name. tcp-store is just > for backward compatibility. > > If you turn on "finer" logging, you should see the size of the session > getting stored. > > -- Scott > >> >> >> c >> >> On Fri, 2008-03-14 at 15:18 -0400, Chad Cannell wrote: >>> We currently have a Resin cluster of 25 nodes, configured to use JDBC >>> persistence. We typically have around 140,000 active sessions. >>> >>> I am considering moving to cluster store persistence. We have been >>> running on a single MySQL database. I have started to look into >>> clustring it and thoght maybe cluster store would be better. >>> >>> Our app doesn't use the session for anything other than login state >>> and >>> the cluster simply provides SSO and LB. >>> >>> How would I go about determining what memory consumption our sessions >>> would add to each node's JVM? Is there any documentation that would >>> show >>> how much memory 1 session would take in it's basic form? I could then >>> extrapilate that out to our load. >>> >>> Any perf gain/loss by going to cluster store? >>> >>> My goal is better HA of session data and no performance degradation. >>> >>> -3 >>> >>> >>> ___ >>> resin-interest mailing list >>> resin-interest@caucho.com >>> http://maillist.caucho.com/mailman/listinfo/resin-interest >>> >>> >> >> >> ___ >> resin-interest mailing list >> resin-interest@caucho.com >> http://maillist.caucho.com/mailman/listinfo/resin-interest > > > > ___ > resin-interest mailing list > resin-interest@caucho.com > http://maillist.caucho.com/mailman/listinfo/resin-interest > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/session-persistence---JDBC-vs-cluster.-tp16058626p20496225.html Sent from the Resin mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ resin-interest mailing list resin-interest@caucho.com http://maillist.caucho.com/mailman/listinfo/resin-interest
Re: [Resin-interest] session persistence - JDBC vs cluster.
On Mar 17, 2008, at 10:15 AM, Chad Cannell wrote: > What is the difference between tcp-store and cluster-store? They're the same. cluster-store is the newer name. tcp-store is just for backward compatibility. If you turn on "finer" logging, you should see the size of the session getting stored. -- Scott > > > c > > On Fri, 2008-03-14 at 15:18 -0400, Chad Cannell wrote: >> We currently have a Resin cluster of 25 nodes, configured to use JDBC >> persistence. We typically have around 140,000 active sessions. >> >> I am considering moving to cluster store persistence. We have been >> running on a single MySQL database. I have started to look into >> clustring it and thoght maybe cluster store would be better. >> >> Our app doesn't use the session for anything other than login state >> and >> the cluster simply provides SSO and LB. >> >> How would I go about determining what memory consumption our sessions >> would add to each node's JVM? Is there any documentation that would >> show >> how much memory 1 session would take in it's basic form? I could then >> extrapilate that out to our load. >> >> Any perf gain/loss by going to cluster store? >> >> My goal is better HA of session data and no performance degradation. >> >> -3 >> >> >> ___ >> resin-interest mailing list >> resin-interest@caucho.com >> http://maillist.caucho.com/mailman/listinfo/resin-interest >> >> > > > ___ > resin-interest mailing list > resin-interest@caucho.com > http://maillist.caucho.com/mailman/listinfo/resin-interest ___ resin-interest mailing list resin-interest@caucho.com http://maillist.caucho.com/mailman/listinfo/resin-interest
Re: [Resin-interest] session persistence - JDBC vs cluster.
What is the difference between tcp-store and cluster-store? c On Fri, 2008-03-14 at 15:18 -0400, Chad Cannell wrote: > We currently have a Resin cluster of 25 nodes, configured to use JDBC > persistence. We typically have around 140,000 active sessions. > > I am considering moving to cluster store persistence. We have been > running on a single MySQL database. I have started to look into > clustring it and thoght maybe cluster store would be better. > > Our app doesn't use the session for anything other than login state > and > the cluster simply provides SSO and LB. > > How would I go about determining what memory consumption our sessions > would add to each node's JVM? Is there any documentation that would > show > how much memory 1 session would take in it's basic form? I could then > extrapilate that out to our load. > > Any perf gain/loss by going to cluster store? > > My goal is better HA of session data and no performance degradation. > > -3 > > > ___ > resin-interest mailing list > resin-interest@caucho.com > http://maillist.caucho.com/mailman/listinfo/resin-interest > > ___ resin-interest mailing list resin-interest@caucho.com http://maillist.caucho.com/mailman/listinfo/resin-interest
[Resin-interest] session persistence - JDBC vs cluster.
We currently have a Resin cluster of 25 nodes, configured to use JDBC persistence. We typically have around 140,000 active sessions. I am considering moving to cluster store persistence. We have been running on a single MySQL database. I have started to look into clustring it and thoght maybe cluster store would be better. Our app doesn't use the session for anything other than login state and the cluster simply provides SSO and LB. How would I go about determining what memory consumption our sessions would add to each node's JVM? Is there any documentation that would show how much memory 1 session would take in it's basic form? I could then extrapilate that out to our load. Any perf gain/loss by going to cluster store? My goal is better HA of session data and no performance degradation. -3 ___ resin-interest mailing list resin-interest@caucho.com http://maillist.caucho.com/mailman/listinfo/resin-interest
