Hi list,
>From my reading of the mod_jk source I have come to the conclusion that
mod_jk maintains a runtime list of load balanced workers in each apache
child process. Is this correct? (Sorry, I'm not very C literate).
The relevance for my deployment situation:
Our production environment consists of 2 apache servers running apache
1.3.29 and mod_jk and 6 tomcat servers running tomcat 4.1.29. All
servers are Sun Blades running Solaris 8.
Apache is set to have:
MaxServers 100
MaxClients 10
KeepAlive off
Each apache uses a load-balanced worker, which uses a worker list of all 6
tomcat instances. There is a mix of dynamic (served by tomcat) and
static content (served by apache). MaxClients, is in fact a standard
apache setting, which we use on the other sites we host and was adopted
for consistency.
We observe in production that the load balancing is heavily skewed;
the first worker in the list attracts the most AJP connections (verified
with netstat and a grep for ESTABLISHED connections). My theory so
far is that because each apache process maintains its own worker list
and we have MaxClients set to 10, the apache processes serve relatively
few requests which create AJP connections before dying.
My plan is to:
- determine the ratio of static/dynamic requests
- set MaxClients so that on average the number of dynamic requests
received is a multiple of 6 (the number of tomcat servers)
I believe this will go some way towards making the load balancing more
even. What does the list think?
On a related matter, if the worker list is stored in process memory, I
wonder if there is any merit having sticky sessions enabled? With our
current setting (having KeepAlive off) they would only be able to re-use
the AJP connection if they are (by chance) re-allocated to the same
apache process.
Apologies if this has been answered before, but I've been subscribed for
some weeks now and I've not noticed it or found anything in the FAQ.
Note: We are required to use Apache 1.3 as we use several bespoke
apache modules which have not been ported to Apache 2. From various
remarks made on this list I have gained an impression that mod_jk2 is
not designed to work with Apache 1.3, so have not so far tested with
jk2. I added this note just in case someone thinks about telling me to
use Apache 2 / jk2 instead :-)
G
--
Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes.
-- E. W. Dijkstra
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
