Re: clustering resin servers

Scott Ferguson wrote:
> Well, this is a reason we'll start encouraging people to use Resin as  
> the web tier.  (Plus we're improving the load balancing in 3.0.20).

What do you mean /start/? :)

> The issue is that the web-tier doesn't know that the backend has  failed 
> until it gets a failure from the write() call.
> 
> A reasonably-sophisticated load balancer (like the Resin one) can  retry 
> the same request on a second backend.   mod_caucho can't.  (And  we will 
> not be adding that capability to mod_caucho because it's not  as 
> testable as Resin is.)
> 
> Actually, there are a number of advantages of using Resin in the web  tier.
> 
>   * Resin can already act as a proxy cache, so static or pseudo- static 
> files can be served directly from cache.

How does this compare with Apache 2.2's disk and mem cache's?  I'd like 
to explore disk or memory caching for static files but Apache 2.2 seems 
to be out only option for this as a solution that is recommened for very 
high traffic/high availability websites.  Previous versions of Apache 
had marked these modules as experimantal.  Do you consider Resin's 
caching of static files fully stable and ready for prime time on /large/ 
websites?

Dave

-- 
David Campbell
Systems Integrator Guardian Unlimited