Re: Application structure for NLB
From: Chris Hohmann (nospam_at_thankyou.com)
Date: 04/27/04
- Next message: mas: "Please help with "Checkboxes""
- Previous message: Steven Burn: "Re: replacing apostrophes in text box"
- In reply to: J. Baute: "Re: Application structure for NLB"
- Next in thread: J. Baute: "Re: Application structure for NLB"
- Reply: J. Baute: "Re: Application structure for NLB"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2004 13:55:26 -0700
"J. Baute" <QQNVICFBGPKG@spammotel.com> wrote in message
news:1c1676e6.0404262302.56decca0@posting.google.com...
> "J. Baute" <WUPYRDEDAWJD@spammotel.com> wrote in message
news:<4088d097$0$10978$a0ced6e1@news.skynet.be>...
> > Hi,
> >
> > we're looking into addapting an intranet site to make it possible to
load
> > balance it.
> > Currently is consist out of 3 major parts which are
> > 1) the code
> > 2) the database with system data & user content
> > 3) html & picture files uploaded and maintainde by users (site
content)
> >
> > Currently the application is split up into to parts, where we have a
backend
> > DB server, and code & content are on the webserver.
> >
> > N° 3 is where we have a "problem". Since this content is variable,
this
> > needs to be available on all NLB'd webservers.
> > Basically it would come down to moving the content, which is now
hosted on
> > the webserver itself, to the backend DB server (or another server),
so that
> > all NLB'd server are always accessing and updating the same shared
data.
> >
> > The thing is that by doing this we are actually putting more load on
the
> > backend server, which will now also be in charge of hosting the
files,
> > indexing them, together with the serving the DB, and the NLB'd
webserver
> > will only be running the code.
> > So in fact, the part that will be load balanced, will be the least
intense
> > part. The bottleneck will be the backend server... so maybe it's
not worth
> > the trouble of LB'ing the whole thing?
> >
> > Thoughts, comments?
>
> anyone?
This is interesting. I was having a discussion recently about this very
topic. An associate of mine was arguing that we should store images,
reports and other object within the database to provide "location
agnostic" access to the files for a web farm scenario. I argued that
it's seldom appropriate to store object in the database and would rather
see references to those files stored in the database or simple use a
virtual directory mapping to provide mirrored access to the same file
share to each web node. So you can either:
1. Store the files in the database. Boo!
OR
2. Use virtual directories to provide mirrored access. Good but not
great
OR
3. Use virtual directories in combination with file references stored in
the database. Great! The best of both worlds.
HTH
-Chris Hohmann
- Next message: mas: "Please help with "Checkboxes""
- Previous message: Steven Burn: "Re: replacing apostrophes in text box"
- In reply to: J. Baute: "Re: Application structure for NLB"
- Next in thread: J. Baute: "Re: Application structure for NLB"
- Reply: J. Baute: "Re: Application structure for NLB"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|