Re: clustering and jvmRoute

2007-02-25 Thread Rainer Jung
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

Re: clustering and jvmRoute

2007-02-23 Thread Kristian Rink
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

Re: clustering and jvmRoute

2007-02-23 Thread Rainer Jung
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

clustering and jvmRoute

2007-02-22 Thread Kristian Rink
Folks; yesterday I dealt with the tomcat clustering feature for the first time, getting things basically set up and working in quite a short time (thanks to the documentation which is rather good), and even made my application distributable / the session attributes serializable really fast. Howev