On Tue, 2008-05-06 at 11:21 -0600, Wade Preston Shearer wrote: > > Storing sessions on an NFS share is usually your only choice. > > What are the downsides to this? The mount failing? anything else?
Even worse performance than local disk storage, mount failing, network performance impact, etc. > > Unless you can configure your load balancer to map to servers by > > source > > IP, and not randomly. > > This is one of the options that I was exploring. If I can keep the > user on the same node, then I can keep file-based sessions on that web > server and everything will be peachy. Are there any downsides to this? If a node dies, that group of users will lose their sessions and possibly connectivity too depending on the quality of the load balancer. > How would a SAN work? A SAN is a special separate network, usually FiberChannel or iSCSI, that can share hard disks to several servers at once. Very expensive startup costs, but very reliable and fast. --lonnie
_______________________________________________ UPHPU mailing list [email protected] http://uphpu.org/mailman/listinfo/uphpu IRC: #uphpu on irc.freenode.net
