Date: Tue, 08 Dec 1998 00:14:37 -0800 From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@zippy.cdrom.com> To: "Victor Granic" <vmg@novator.com> Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Is it possible? Message-ID: <85152.913104877@zippy.cdrom.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 07 Dec 1998 22:02:46 EST." <199812080302.WAA03519@ns.novator.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> I have run into the proverbial brick wall. I am the administrator of > a fairly busy electronic commerce Web site, www.ftd.com. Because of > the demand placed on a single server, I implemented a load balancing > solution that utilizes NFS in the back end. The versions of FreeBSD Hmmm. Well, as you've already noted, NFS is not really sufficient to this task and never has been. There has never been any locking with our NFS and, as evidence would tend to suggest, never a degree of interest on anyone's part sufficient to actually motivate them to implement the functionality. Even with working NFS locks, it's also probably an inferior solution to what many folks are doing and that's load balancing at the IP level. Something like the Coyote Point Systems Equalizer package (which is also based on FreeBSD, BTW) which takes n boxes and switches the traffic for them from one FreeBSD box using load metrics and other heuristics to determine the best match for a request would be a fine solution, as would any of the several other similar products on the market. Unless you're up for doing an NFS lock implementation, that is. Terry's patches only address some purported bugs in the general NFS code, they don't actually implement the lock daemon and other functionality you'd need to have truly working NFS locks. Evidently, this isn't something which has actually interested Terry enough to do either. :-) - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?85152.913104877>