David, On 1/22/10 12:34 PM, "David Halik" <dha...@jla.rutgers.edu> wrote: > > We currently have IP session 'sticky' on our L4's and it didn't help all > that much. yes, it reduces thrashing on the backend, but ultimately it > won't help the corruption. Like you said, multiple logins will still go > to different servers when the IP's are different. > > How if your webmail architecture setup? We're using imapproxy to spread > them them out across the same load balancer, so essentially all traffic > from outside and inside get's balanced. The trick is we have an internal > load balanced virtual IP that spreads the load out for webmail on > private IP space. If they were to go outside they would get NAT'd as one > outbound IP, so we just go inside and get the benefit of balancing.
We have two webmail interfaces - one is an old in-house open-source project called Alphamail, the new one is Roundcube. Both of them point at the same VIP that we point users at, with no special rules. We're running straight round-robin L4 connection distribution, with no least-connections or sticky-client rules. We've been running this way for about 3 years I think.. I've only been here a year. We made a number of changes in sequence starting about three and a half years ago - Linux NFS to Netapp, Courier to Dovecot, mbox to Maildir+, LVS to F5 BigIP; not necessarily in that order. At no point have we ever had any sort of session affinity. > That's where we are, and as long as the corruptions stay user invisible, > I'm fine with it. Crashes seem to be the only user visible issue so far, > with "noac" being out of the question unless they buy a ridiculously > expensive filer. Yeah, as long as the users don't see it, I'm happy to live with the messages in the log file. -Brad