Kristian Rink schrieb:
> This seems reasonable. However, in terms of load balancing, I wonder
> whether there are any benchmark / comparisons on that:
Of course, stickyness and load balancing are contrary goals. So there
will be no solution with stikyness and perfect load balancing.
> - Using sti
Rainer;
at first, thanks for your hints and getting my view on the world set
straight again. ;)
[Rainer Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> @ Fri, 23 Feb 2007 09:32:59
+0100]
> But: with stickyness (different jvmRoutes and a session sticky load
> balancer) you only rely on the correctness of the replicat
It works, because clustering means session replication. Any changes to
sessions are replicated to the other cluster members, so any member can
server any session, even if no member failed.
But: with stickyness (different jvmRoutes and a session sticky load
balancer) you only rely on the correc
