Re: [OT] Session replication vs stateless

2007-08-28 Thread Christopher Schultz
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Lb, lightbulb432 wrote: > >> Don't forget that you can't be stateless if you >> need logins of some type (unless you use BASIC auth, which looks ugly >> from a user point of view). > > Why is this? Others who answered to this thread and discussions

Re: [OT] Session replication vs stateless

2007-08-28 Thread lightbulb432
That sounds about right. Don't forget that you can't be stateless if you > need logins of some type (unless you use BASIC auth, which looks ugly > from a user point of view). Why is this? Others who answered to this thread and discussions in general around web applications describe statelessness

Re: [OT] Session replication vs stateless

2007-08-27 Thread Christopher Schultz
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Lb, lightbulb432 wrote: > Let me see if I have my options straight - stateless app tier and no session > affinity, or stateful app tier (i.e. HttpSessions) with session affinity? That sounds about right. Don't forget that you can't be stateless if yo

Re: [OT] Session replication vs stateless

2007-08-27 Thread lightbulb432
Thanks for your response. So it sounds like session replication is out for sure - you confirmed my initial feelings about it. Let me see if I have my options straight - stateless app tier and no session affinity, or stateful app tier (i.e. HttpSessions) with session affinity? The former allows y

Re: [OT] Session replication vs stateless

2007-08-25 Thread Rémy Maucherat
On 8/24/07, lightbulb432 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Although the debate between session replication vs stateless can't be > definitively solved and depends on the application, I'd like to hear about > your experiences with both. How are you designing your current applications, > and what implicat

Re: [OT] Session replication vs stateless

2007-08-24 Thread Christopher Schultz
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Lightbulb, lightbulb432 wrote: > How are you designing your current applications, and what > implications has the choice that you might not have expected - would > you do anything differently if you could? (For the record, I am not using session repl

Re: [OT] Session replication vs stateless

2007-08-24 Thread Filip Hanik - Dev Lists
I'd go the opposite direction, I will do stateless before attempting any kind of replication or distributed cache. The scalability of a stateless application will outscale any replicated app any day, since your fail over options are so much more simplified. Filip Dwayne wrote: Have you consid

Re: [OT] Session replication vs stateless

2007-08-24 Thread Dwayne
Have you considered distributed caching for session replication? I avoid stateless like the plague. There are several tools out there for this, but my favorite (because they are open source) is Terracotta. It clusters the JVMs. Native clustering in Tomcat putters out, in my experience, after 3 n