6
>
> Raquib,
>
> On 1/28/14, 3:18 PM, Raquib Hasan wrote:
> > Do you mean, if just the sticky session is used, tomcat clustering
> > won't be needed?
>
> In some ways, yes, it is that simple.
>
> In other ways it is not.
>
> If you use sticky-sessions w
Chris,
Do you mean, if just the sticky session is used, tomcat clustering won't be
needed?
Thanks,
Raquib Hasan
On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 12:37 PM, Christopher Schultz <
ch...@christopherschultz.net> wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> Raquib
:)
On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 11:28 AM, André Warnier wrote:
> Christopher Schultz wrote:
> ...
>
> I am thinking like, there would be a LB VIP that the client
>>> requests would be communicating with. The sticky session would be
>>> enabled in the LB and there is no need of apache web server in
<
ch...@christopherschultz.net> wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> Raquib,
>
> On 1/28/14, 10:03 AM, Raquib Hasan wrote:
> > I am creating a tomcat cluster following helps I found online. My
> > question is, do I have to use the Apache
Hello,
I am creating a tomcat cluster following helps I found online. My question
is, do I have to use the Apache(mod_jk) for session replication? Is it
possible to use F5 load balancer directly bypassing the Apache? Primary
purpose of the cluster is fail over. Load balancing is not needed. I thin
