I don't have a crystal ball to look into your setup, but I would remove htt=
pd and set up the LB and Tomcat. Less moving parts, so it is easier to thin=
k about.
And read this: http://tomcat.apache.org/tomcat-7.0-doc/cluster-howto.html
Ronald.
Op donderdag, 6 oktober 2011 12:43 schreef Alexander Diedler <adiedler@tecr=
acer.de>:
>=20
> =20
> =20
> Hello,
> I mean a frontend Apache httpd and backend Tomcat server.
> Loadbalancing would be done by a hardware load balancer fronted to the
> Apache Webserver, so we should not balance the request two times. It sho=
uld
> be only a Failovercluster.
> =20
> =20
> =20
> Best regards
> Alexander
> =20
> =20
> -----Urspr=C3=BCngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Ronald Klop (Mailing List) [mailto:ronald-mailinglist@base.nl]
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 6. Oktober 2011 10:44
> An: Tomcat Users List
> Betreff: Re: Preferred configuration with Hardware Loadbalancer
> =20
> What do you mean by Apache Webserver? Do you mean Apache Tomcat or Apach=
e
> httpd?
> =20
> And do you want Failover (active-passive) or Loadbalancing (active-acti=
ve)?
> =20
> Ronald.
> =20
> =20
> Op donderdag, 6 oktober 2011 10:36 schreef Alexander Diedler
> <adiedler@tecracer.de>:
> >
> > =20
> > =20
> > =20
> > =20
> > Hello, =20
> > =20
> > I am just planning a Application cluster for Tomcat. We have a big
> hardware loadbalancer (Cisco) and three virtual servers. We talked about
> several configurations, but it is not clear for us, how to build a Tomca=
t
> cluster, with Failover and Session-Replication, but without Loadbalancin=
g? =20
> > =20
> > E.g. the LB redirect the request to node 1. The Apache Webserver redir=
ects
> the request to node2. So we have a double load-balancing, what ne would
> avoid. =20
> > =20
> > =20
> > =20
> > Best regards =20
> > =20
> > Alexander =20
> > =20
> > =20
> > =20
> > =20
> > =20
> > =20
> > =20
> > =20
> >
> =20
>=20
>=20
> =20
> =20
> =20
>
|