Re: My app does not serialize.. any user-to-lvs controle possible?

[Matthew Crocker <matthew@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

> Actually, were I stand there is no difference: if I can't replicate my
> http sessions, there is no way to recover from a realserver crash
> anyway...
> Hmmm... Wait a minute... Yes, there is a problem:
> Even not being able to recover a lost [http] session, it would be nice 
> to
> have another realserver answer my clients (who would need to start all
> over again what they were doing, like "logging in"). IIRC (If I 
> Remenmber
> Correctly), the persistance would prevent me from obtaining this 
> failover
> (even if it is failover without recovery), right?
> Or has there been found a way to "clear" the persistence table for some
> realserver?
If you are monitoring the services on the real server when the server 
goes down the monitoring script will remove it from the LVS table.  
When the server is removed from the table the persistence mapping goes 
poof and a new connection from the client will go to a new operating 
real server.
> > >    a2) As persistence is "per-ip", a lousy load balancing when having
> > > a
> > > proxy in the middle (that I know I'll have)
> > boxes are cheap now. So you have a few that aren't well balanced. Is
> > that a big deal?
> Ok, I guess not...
>
> > >  b) Try some way to have some control over WHEN the timeout and the
> > > stickiness of the session work: It would be needed that somehow the
> > > lvs director would be informed that
> > > "a new http session 'bla' started ... -> start a tcp session
> > > session 'bla' ended .... -> end the tcp session"
This is Layer 7 stuff,  LVS is layer 3.   Check out klvstcpd ?? which 
is a kernel based Layer 3+ load balance project. Work in progress....
Matthew Crocker
Vice President
Crocker Communications

w.  413-746-2760
f. 413-746-3704
e. matthew@xxxxxxxxxxx