On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 12:42 PM, Willy Tarreau <w...@1wt.eu> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 08:48:14AM +0800, Jeffrey 'jf' Lim wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 3:48 AM, Willy Tarreau <w...@1wt.eu> wrote:
>> > On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 12:31:27PM -0700, John L. Singleton wrote:
>> >> I'm a little mystified as to the usefulness of this as well. I mean,
>> >> what does hashing the domain name solve that just balancing back to a
>> >> bunch of Apache instances with virtual hosting turned on doesn't? Are
>> >> you saying that you have domains like en.example.com, fr.example.com
>> >> and you want them all to be sticky to the same backend server when
>> >> they balance? If that's the case, I could see that being useful if the
>> >> site in question were doing some sort of expensive per-user asset
>> >> generation that was being cached on the server. Is this what you are
>> >> talking about?
>> >
>> > There are proxies which can do prefetching, and in this case, it's
>> > desirable that all requests for a same domain name pass through the
>> > same cache.
>> >
>>
>> so are you saying haproxy -> cache -> backend? (in which case, you
>> would be talking more about an ISP, i think? or does anybody here not
>> running an ISP actually do this (I would be interested to know))
>
> not necessarily, it can also be :
> customers -> haproxy -> caches -> world
>
right!! :) interesting....
-jf
--
In the meantime, here is your PSA:
"It's so hard to write a graphics driver that open-sourcing it would not help."
-- Andrew Fear, Software Product Manager, NVIDIA Corporation
http://kerneltrap.org/node/7228
