| From: | PFC <lists(at)peufeu(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Mark Woodward" <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Christopher Browne" <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: vacuum, performance, and MVCC |
| Date: | 2006-06-22 20:03:22 |
| Message-ID: | op.tbkcnwsicigqcu@apollo13 |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> What you seem not to grasp at this point is a large web-farm, about 10 or
> more servers running PHP, Java, ASP, or even perl. The database is
> usually
> the most convenient and, aside from the particular issue we are talking
> about, best suited.
The answer is sticky sessions : each user is assigned to one and only one
webserver in the cluster and his session is maintained locally, in RAM. No
locks, no need to manage distributed session...
> I actually have a good number of years of experience in this topic, and
> memcached or file system files are NOT the best solutions for a server
> farm.
If sessions are distributed, certainly, but if sessions are sticky to
their own server ?
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stefan Kaltenbrunner | 2006-06-22 20:08:19 | Re: [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions |
| Previous Message | Stefan Kaltenbrunner | 2006-06-22 20:00:50 | Re: Overhead for stats_command_string et al, take 2 |