not sure if thats what you want, but squid _can_ act as a frontend to
multiple backend-servers. check out the squid users guide
which deals with "accelerator" options


On Mon, 8 Jan 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

:Hmm.  That's been my thought on squid as well, given its ground-up design
:for caching in the first place.  My worry, though, is that with squid I lose
:support for virtual hosts on seperate boxes, because I need to support Zope,
:static content, and some legacy stuff running ColdFusion on an NT box.  My
:impression is that Squid's http accelerator mode (inverse transparent proxy,
:or whatever you want to call it) is somewhat of an afterthought compared to
:the standard proxy use case.  If it supports the ability to direct traffic
:based upon the virtual host address, then squid works - if not, I think I
:have to go the Apache route... I also wonder just how good Apache's
:mod_proxy caching is?  Any thoughts?
:-----Original Message-----
:From: Shane Hathaway [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
:Sent: Monday, January 08, 2001 12:59 PM
:Subject: Re: [Zope] Caching/http-acceleration and proxying Zope-served
:> I have a question, for anyone experienced in working with Zope and caching
:> proxies:
:> I'm setting up a load-balanced server farm that has nodes that will run
:> Apache and proxy (via mod_proxy) to ZEO clients running ZServer.  This
:> is routed (both ways) through a layer 4 load-balancing appliance, and all
:> these boxes (both nodes and the balancer) are sitting inside a DMZ with
:> private IP addresses.  The public world will access these servers via a
:> firewall box running transparent proxy (actually, I guess, similar to
:> squid's http_accel mode; the semantics here are a bit tricky, as it's more
:> of a inverse trans-proxy).  Between Apache and Zope, there would be
:> virtual hosts, and I'd be using the SiteAccess product.  It gets a bit
:> tricky in that I need to access several different virtual hosts inside the
:> DMZ (one for the ZEO farm, and another for a dedicated CGI-based ad server
:> on another box) via the proxy.  A more detailed (ascii art) diagram of
:> I am trying to do, is at
:> My question is this: does anybody have any thoughts on the merits of Squid
:> (http accelerator mode) versus Apache/mod_proxy in terms of caching,
:> hosts, and the like when working with Zope sites?  Any big pitfalls to
:> kind of setup with Zope sites?
:I would prefer Squid since its only purpose in life is caching.  It
:follows the "do one thing and do it well" mantra.
:But whatever your choice, I hope you make use of the new CacheManagement
:feature in Zope 2.3.  It is designed to make things like this
:straightforward and easy.  There's a recent news announcement that links
:to everything you need--including complete help docs!
:Zope maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
:**   No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
:(Related lists -
: )
:Zope maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
:**   No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
:(Related lists -
: )


peter sabaini, mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Zope maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
**   No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - )

Reply via email to