I'm late joining this discussion, but wanted to add my 2 cents. We are using mod_proxy and a patched mod_rewrite to do sticky load balancing. Mod_rewrite supports cookies, but not session based cookies. I added this functionality and posted the patch here (see "mod_rewrite cookie patch (PR#28391)")- still trying to figure out how to get it included in the httpd.
I would find it very useful if keepalive connections were supported in mod_proxy. If I could reuse the connections, my sticky load balancing solution, which supports tomcat and the older enhydra or any app server that has a unqie cookie, would be as fast as a normal ajp connector. Byron > -----Original Message----- > From: Graham Leggett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2004 7:22 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Invitation to HTTPD commiters in tomcat-dev > > André Malo wrote: > > > Where's the user base of mod_imap (installed by default) or > > mod_cern_meta or the old outdated NCSA config directives? > We add and > > add and add code -- which is not actually bad. But where's > the man with the broom? > > The issue of unmaintained code is an important issue, but not > one which should stop us considering new code. Whether > mod_rewrite is maintained or not has nothing to do with a > potential proxy_ajp, a module which by virtue of the volume > of the discussion on it is certainly not going to have any > maintenance issues any time soon. :) > > But at the end of the day guys with brooms are not what is > important, it is the end users, whether there are any, and > whether they're satisfied. > If the code works and the users are happy, there is no need > for a broom. > > > Just to make sure, I'm not finally against adding a new module. But > > IMHO the much better way should be to improve the integration of TP > > modules rather than to put all of them in the core distribution. > > Thing is it's easier for end users to not have to mess around > with third party builds if it can possibly be avoided, and > it's the needs of the end users who are the most important, > not the developers. > > The fact that the current module has to be built separately > is a huge issue for the users of the module, making such a > module a built in addition to proxy will make people's lives easier. > > Regards, > Graham > -- >
