Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-modperl-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 67146 invoked by uid 500); 10 Sep 2002 15:29:59 -0000 Mailing-List: contact modperl-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Delivered-To: mailing list modperl@perl.apache.org Received: (qmail 67130 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2002 15:29:58 -0000 Message-ID: <3D7E0FF5.20801@elem.com> Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2002 11:29:57 -0400 From: Perrin Harkins User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020530 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mod_perl@att.net CC: "Calbazana, Al" , modperl@apache.org Subject: Re: lame load balancer, mod_proxy, and sticky sessions References: <20020910151814.RPKC12112.mtiwmhc21.worldnet.att.net@webmail.worldnet.att.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N mod_perl@att.net wrote: > The idea to modify mod_proxy.c is probaly the most > convenient solution. Instead of configure backend > machine from the ProxyPass setting, you may specifically > assign it to the one in the cookie, which takes only a > few lines of code to change --- well, plus extra steps > to handle the cookie. But you're not accounting for the possibility of server failure on the backend. A proper load-balancer (including the open source ones and mod_backhand) would detect dead servers and handle the failover to another server. Building this yourself is probably not worth it, with so many open source solutions already available. - Perrin