At 12:07 PM 11/29/01 -0500, Jeff Johnson wrote: > > What do you think of the option we sort of outlined yesterday: > > > > - Software or hardware load balancer distributes incoming > > requests randomly > > to a pool of machines running Apache (call them APACHE1, > > APACHE2, etc). > > - APACHE1, APACHE2, etc have a modified version of the WebKit adapter > > running on them. The modification is: if no session ID is > > found in the > > request, it sends the request to a random machine, otherwise > > it parses the > > session ID to find which particular machine to send the > > request to, from a > > pool of available WebKit machines (WEBKIT1, WEBKIT2, etc). > > The pool of > > machines would be configurable in the adapter's config file. > > - WEBKIT1, WEBKIT2, etc have a modified version of Session.py > > that encodes > > the machine name into the session key. This would be configured in > > Application.config. The session key would be something like > > "WEBKIT1_237480927". > > > > The idea being to keep requests for the same session on the same > > machine. Would this work for you? I'm interested in helping > > to write the > > WebKit modifications needed. > >I'm a fan of cookies (or too lazy to do it the other way) but some >people have said they can't count on them. Would this support those >folks too?
It could be made to support them -- you just have to make sure the the logic in the adapter knows how to find the session ID, whatever method is being used to encode it. >One of the suggestions for multi-domains bothers me, not only would >bookmarks be server specific but SSL certs would have to exist for each >domain. But wouldn't the hardware load balancer make it look to the user like there's only a single box, even though it's actually distributing the requests to multiple back ends machines running Apache? I don't know about the multiple SSL certs; could you just use a single cert and place it onto all of your boxes? > > > > The other option is, as you said, to write a > > SessionSQLStore.py to store > > sessions in a database. You have to be a little bit careful > > about locking > > here, since multiple requests for the same session may be coming from > > different appservers at the same time. I'm not sure how to > > avoid wiping > > out one appserver's changes with another appserver's changes > > in that case. > >I started thinking about those issues and no longer think it's trivial >:). All reads and writes would probably have to go through a method >that locked the SQL table. Luckily I've never had to lock tables. I >try to avoid db vendor specific code but I think you'd have to do it for >this. -- - Geoff Talvola [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Webware-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/webware-discuss
