Well, then don't use J2EE.
BEA support is supposed to be the best, and sure, it's pretty nice in that
if you've spent lots of money, your issue can be escalated quickly, but if
it is a real bug, it'll eventually come down to 'yes, it's a bug, it'll be
fixed in the next service pack', which is often not due for another few
weeks (by the way, this is exactly the situation I was in). I think you'll
find that there are plenty of users on this list who have deployed Orion
on a high-availability site that have been running smoothly for months
now, it's just that when it works, there's very little reason to be loud
and vocal about it.
On Wed, 11 Apr 2001, calvin matthews wrote:
> Thanks for your input Dan,
>
> The dilemma that we face is not a question of failover. We propose to have a
> hardware loadbalancer such as local director fronting a number of apache
> servers that talk to a cluster of J2EE application servers, which in turn
> talk to a clustered database. This gives us scaleability and reliability.
>
> Our problem is that our users rely on our site being up all of the time. If
> our site is down for even a day we could pottentially to lose all our users.
>
> I understand your suggestion of using orion as a backup, but if we were to
> find a fundamental fault in the server then no matter how many orion servers
> we used we would not get away from it. And at present there is nobody
> (officially) that we could turn to for support to help resolve the issue.
> This makes company directors very nervous and with a big emphasis put on
> uptime and availability of our site they have to buy into the solution.
>
> On a simmilar note. It seems that the orion load balancer app becomes a
> single point of failiure and I have read many accounts of it being buggy and
> slow.
>
> Do you know of any way of replacing this application transparently with an
> alternative and keep session integrity? I read an old posting suggesting a
> product called FOUNDRY. Does any one have any more info on this?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Calvin
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Dan North
> Sent: 10 April 2001 10:57
> To: Orion-Interest
> Subject: RE: Alternative Deployment
>
>
> Following up the failover approach,....
>
>
>
