Re: [load balancing] software vs appliances.

From: tc lewis (tclIZZATbunzy.net)
Date: Fri Feb 23 2001 - 02:06:55 EST

  • Next message: tony bourke: "Re: [load balancing] software vs appliances."

    On Fri, 23 Feb 2001, tony bourke wrote:

    > > can this be explained more? the balancer should open http requests, take
    > > out the cookies, parse them, and then send certain flags to a persistent
    > > real server?
    >
    > Cookie-based persistence is where the load balancer reads the cookie
    > before handing an HTTP request off to a server. Often times it's required
    > that the same server handle an individual user's traffic, such as with a
    > web store.

    i can't imagine any modern-day application being written requiring this,
    but i suppose i can see where it would be necessary. for example, my
    employer stores session information in a database accessable from any
    web server. i've seen shared filesystems used for this as well. but yeah
    when local disks or storing session info in webserver memory comes into
    play, i can see how that would be useful.

    even beyond that, however, one would hope clients would use http
    keep-alive. and even beyond that, one could still use persistence on the
    ip level -- it just might not be evenly-balanced in the off chance that
    you get x number of hits from people behind the same masquerading/proxy
    gateway and little hits from other ips.

    so i still hesitate to consider that a priority. depends on
    the applications, i suppose. nevertheless, i now see your point.

    is aol that bad? aren't the ips per users still geographically dispersed?
    do they use web caches that only send requests from a small number of ips?
    i have little first-hand experience with a majority of web hits coming
    from aol. curious.

    -tcl.



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Feb 23 2001 - 02:09:25 EST