Thank you for your response. I am not looking for caching/site acceleration capabilities. I am looking at pure load balancing capabilities only.
Are there any know pros/cons or limitations of mod_proxy_balancer and varnish load balancing? Capabilities that the load balancer that I am looking for are: 1. Must be able to sustain and be performant in high load and volume conditions 2. Should support session stickyness and possibly failover from on node to another without the client requiring to submit the request again 3. Easy to deploy and configure. Possibly - ability to add and remove nodes from the load balanced farm on the fly Kind Regards Anurag Kapur On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 8:02 AM, <kashif.rah...@in.com> wrote: > You need to decide what options you want from Varnish or > mod_proxy_balancer.**** > > ** ** > > Both are different. Varnish is basically for cache and you will not > achieve cache from mod_proxy_balancer. **** > > ** ** > > You can use mod_proxy_balancer for failover and then use Varnish for > better performance/cache on both nodes.**** > > ** ** > > Do let me know what are your concerns and specifically what you are > looking in them for.**** > > ** ** > > Thank you,**** > > ** ** > > Best Regards,**** > > * > Kashif Rahman* > > Principal SCM Engineer**** > > [image: Description: vopium_signature_logo]**** > > * * > > [image: Description: imagesCAV9FMB1] + 92 334 9771227 | [image: > Description: imagesCAXWPPLS] kashif_r | *w* www.vopium.com**** > > ** ** > > *From:* Anurag Kapur [mailto:anuragka...@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Friday, June 22, 2012 4:01 AM > *To:* users@httpd.apache.org > *Subject:* Re: [users@httpd] Software Load Balancers | mod_proxy_balancer > and Varnish**** > > ** ** > > No, I am looking to pick one of mod_proxy_balancer or varnish and thus > looking for pros and cons.**** > > ** ** > > Anurag > > **** > > On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 11:24 PM, Filipe Cifali <cifali.fil...@gmail.com> > wrote:**** > > Ldirectord**** > > ** ** >
<<image002.jpg>>
<<image003.jpg>>
<<image001.png>>
