Re: clustering and failover

2013-07-01 Thread Martin Grigorov
Hi Uwe,

There are no pagemaps since 1.5.0.
Only the last used stateful page instance is kept in the memory (as an
attribute in the http session).
The Memcached Session Manager for Tomcat is just an internal of how Tomcat
will manage its http sessions.
For the application there is no change at all. Wicket still will use the
Servlet APIs and Tomcat will do something different than what it does by
default without exposing this to you.

On the other hand if you provide your own implementation of Wicket's
ISessionStore (I know the code in 1.5/6.x better than 1.4.x but I guess it
is similar in 1.4.x too) then you can store Wicket's Session and the last
stateful page instance in something else than the Http Session, e.g. in
Memcached/Hazelcast/Redis/

In all cases your app should be able to work without sticky sessions
because if a Tomcat node goes down for any reason then your clients will be
directed to other node(s).



On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 2:09 PM, uwe schaefer u...@codesmell.de wrote:

 On 06/29/2013 03:49 PM, William Speirs wrote:

 Another consideration is if you're using any authentication
 Been there, still have the bite marks from that :-)


 *g* thanks Bill, i planned to do session clustering, but have the pagemap
 seperate, so that i hopefully would not run into this.

 cu uwe



 --**--**-
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
 users-unsubscribe@wicket.**apache.orgusers-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org




Re: clustering and failover

2013-06-30 Thread uwe schaefer

On 06/29/2013 03:49 PM, William Speirs wrote:

Another consideration is if you're using any authentication
Been there, still have the bite marks from that :-)


*g* thanks Bill, i planned to do session clustering, but have the 
pagemap seperate, so that i hopefully would not run into this.


cu uwe


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org



Re: clustering and failover

2013-06-29 Thread William Speirs
Another consideration is if you're using any authentication that
relies upon the tomcat session, then bouncing to another box (if
you're doing round-robin load balanced) would mean your users will
have to reauthenticate.

Been there, still have the bite marks from that :-)

Bill-

On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 4:50 PM, uwe schaefer u...@uwe-schaefer.org wrote:
 On 06/28/2013 09:19 AM, Martin Grigorov wrote:

 Hi Martin,

 i already saw and consider your memcached-based session management, thanks.
 the reason i ask the wicket mailing list is, that i assume that wicket only
 needs part of the pagemap (namely the current page) to serve a request, so
 that - hopefully - the data needed to serve a single request can be smaller
 if the pagemap is kept seperate from the session.

 is this assumption correct?

 cu uwe


 I think you should ask this question in Tomcat mailing list.
 Also check https://code.google.com/p/memcached-session-manager/


 On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 8:46 AM, Uwe Schäfer u...@codesmell.de wrote:

 hi

 quick question about clustering: am i right to believe that putting
 session/pagemap data in a memcached-like storage has advantages over the
 tomcat session clustering in terms of latency and robust failover
 behaviour?
 i mean, the latter obviously has the data nearby (when assuming sticky
 sessions) whereas the first needs to grab it from (and push it to)
 external
 storage every time even though it is far more selective about what it
 needs.

 i was wondering if tomcat session clustering can effectivly update only
 the dirty parts of the session data?

 i'd love any kind of feedback on that topic INCLUDING 'depends'-answers
 :)

 cu uwe

 --**--**-
 To unsubscribe, e-mail:
 users-unsubscribe@wicket.**apache.orgusers-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org





 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org

 For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org



Re: clustering and failover

2013-06-28 Thread Martin Grigorov
Hi,

I think you should ask this question in Tomcat mailing list.
Also check https://code.google.com/p/memcached-session-manager/


On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 8:46 AM, Uwe Schäfer u...@codesmell.de wrote:

 hi

 quick question about clustering: am i right to believe that putting
 session/pagemap data in a memcached-like storage has advantages over the
 tomcat session clustering in terms of latency and robust failover behaviour?
 i mean, the latter obviously has the data nearby (when assuming sticky
 sessions) whereas the first needs to grab it from (and push it to) external
 storage every time even though it is far more selective about what it needs.

 i was wondering if tomcat session clustering can effectivly update only
 the dirty parts of the session data?

 i'd love any kind of feedback on that topic INCLUDING 'depends'-answers :)

 cu uwe

 --**--**-
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
 users-unsubscribe@wicket.**apache.orgusers-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org




Re: clustering and failover

2013-06-28 Thread uwe schaefer

On 06/28/2013 09:19 AM, Martin Grigorov wrote:

Hi Martin,

i already saw and consider your memcached-based session management, thanks.
the reason i ask the wicket mailing list is, that i assume that wicket 
only needs part of the pagemap (namely the current page) to serve a 
request, so that - hopefully - the data needed to serve a single request 
can be smaller if the pagemap is kept seperate from the session.


is this assumption correct?

cu uwe


I think you should ask this question in Tomcat mailing list.
Also check https://code.google.com/p/memcached-session-manager/


On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 8:46 AM, Uwe Schäfer u...@codesmell.de wrote:


hi

quick question about clustering: am i right to believe that putting
session/pagemap data in a memcached-like storage has advantages over the
tomcat session clustering in terms of latency and robust failover behaviour?
i mean, the latter obviously has the data nearby (when assuming sticky
sessions) whereas the first needs to grab it from (and push it to) external
storage every time even though it is far more selective about what it needs.

i was wondering if tomcat session clustering can effectivly update only
the dirty parts of the session data?

i'd love any kind of feedback on that topic INCLUDING 'depends'-answers :)

cu uwe

--**--**-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
users-unsubscribe@wicket.**apache.orgusers-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org







-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org



clustering and failover

2013-06-27 Thread Uwe Schäfer

hi

quick question about clustering: am i right to believe that putting 
session/pagemap data in a memcached-like storage has advantages over the 
tomcat session clustering in terms of latency and robust failover behaviour?
i mean, the latter obviously has the data nearby (when assuming sticky 
sessions) whereas the first needs to grab it from (and push it to) 
external storage every time even though it is far more selective about 
what it needs.


i was wondering if tomcat session clustering can effectivly update only 
the dirty parts of the session data?


i'd love any kind of feedback on that topic INCLUDING 'depends'-answers :)

cu uwe

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@wicket.apache.org