This feels like it's about clustering ATS servers, not the origins behind it? Our design would like something like this: LOAD BALANCERS --> POOL OF ATS SERVERS --> POOL OF ORIGINS. In our case the origin is the application server.
So we would have say an Active/Passive LB Pair as the externally presented host. Behind that VIP would be a pool of 3 or more ATS servers (for redundancy) and each ATS server would use a POOL of origins. From the examples I've seen it appears that there is an assumption by ATS that the Origin is a VIP, and thus its extracted itself from managing a pool of hosts for a single origin? Additionally I saw that there are mapping configurations for using multiple (different) origins. The ATS Server Pool, seems pretty straightforward, but specifically I'm trying to find how I would craft a mapping rule such multiple origins for the same mapping. From: Jason Giedymin [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, November 18, 2011 9:45 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Using Multiple/Redundant Backend Origins I believe what your looking for is clustering ATS which serve multiple origins (in round robin/ etc) manner. https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TS/Clustering There are still some kinks in it but its getting better. On Nov 18, 2011, at 9:32 AM, Petzel, David wrote: Hello, We are currently in the process of evaluating a new http caching solution and on that list is Apache Traffic Server. We've been reading through the online documentation and have a pretty good feel for the product, however there is one item we are a little clear on. It seems that mapping rules always assume a one-to-one relationship from host to origin. We are interested in having multiple redundant origins behind a single host. In Varnish they call this a director, and I'm trying to understand what the equivalent in ATS would be. We do understand that we could use a load balancer VIP as the origin to provide this functionality, however if possible we're looking to have the "Caching Servers" communicate directly with the origin providers, rather than routing through a VIP. Could someone point me at the appropriate documentation where this is described? Thanks
