Re: load balancing with php/apache?

> > We used LocalDirector for awhile, with it's 'sticky bit' functionality, > and it basically didn't work with AOL. I just looked at the > coyote product and they claim it works with 'large ISP' proxies - maybe a > veiled > reference to AOL directly (why not just say AOL?). from my testing, the "EQUALIZER" (I kind of like how obnoxious the name is, actually :) does in fact work with AOL. > Do you have any more info on HOW they do this? The > only thing I can think of is that they code it recognize particular IP blocks > known to be proxies for AOL/mindspring/etc and route ALL traffic from these to > a > particular box, which doesn't seem terribly balanced. OR... they drop a > separate > 'cookie' or similar header data piece between the server and the client and > track > that. The installation I tested is not large, though, and I did not hit it with more than one client.. in the case of the particular site, it doesn't matter... but I would be interested to know that. > Either way, it seems a bit expensive, although cheaper than LD, last time I > checked. Yeah, Cisco r' bastards :) At _least_ for the money, their stuff does actually work most of the time. > Personally, we do the 'stateless' model with session data in a database - > works > fine. Your coyote solution is still stateless, but the session data is kept > local > to the webserver. Yeah, we might end up writing a session handler for binarycloud, probably "switchable" so you can store sessions on the machine re: php.ini, or pipe 'em to your DB. > Problem I see with that is that if you need to take a particular machine > offline, > hundreds of people could lose their session data. Same can be said of taking > the > database offline, but taking a db offline will probably affect the whole site > anyway. Part of the benefit of an intelligent load balancer is that you can > remove/take down machines for maintenance/upgrades without worrying about the > impact on the visitors. > > Am I missing something? Nope, not a thing. That is a consequence of the stateless-but-not-quite model. In my case, it's fine. In other cases, it certainly is not :) _alex > > Alex Black wrote: > >> what? >> >> you use an utterly completely stateless model? >> >> craziness! >> >> so you set cookies, and store the sig in the db? >> >> agh! :) >> >> I'm using this box from "coyote systems" called, wait for it: >> >> "THE EQUALIZER" >> >> which is a really obnoxious name, but it sticks clients with a particular >> server intelligently, so we can be ever-so-slightly-lazy about that. >> >> do you _like_ that system? (that isn't a challenge, it's real interest) >> >> _a >> >> -- >> Alex Black, Head Monkey >> enigma@turingstudio.com >> >> The Turing Studio, Inc. >> http://www.turingstudio.com >> >> vox+510.666.0074 >> fax+510.666.0093 >> >> Saul Zaentz Film Center >> 2600 Tenth St Suite 433 >> Berkeley, CA 94710-2522 >> > >