> Is anyone running weblocks in an environment with more than one > weblocks server?
In my experience, that has not been necessary, but it depends on how many users one expects to have! You could always load-balance between multiple weblocks servers, and use a load-balancer in front, which should work with sticky sessions. I suppose you'd need to use a database-server then, though, or a key-value store or something. This, from http://onsmalltalk.com/scaling-seaside-redux-enter-the-penguin may be apropos: >Now lets setup the load balancer. Seaside requires session persistence to do >the magic it does, so we need to configure HAProxy to use a cookie to ensure a >user gets >routed to the appropriate server each time. All that talk about >statelessness being necessary is crap, an old onion in the web framework >recipe that isn't at all necessary >and is actually crippling. Yes, stateless >websites are easier to scale but they're much harder to develop because state >exists, it's just a matter of whether you marshal it >manually or let the >framework do it. I'll take the latter because it scales well enough for what I >need and saves me boatloads of time. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "weblocks" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/weblocks?hl=en.
