Re: vacuum, performance, and MVCC

On Jun 22, 2006, at 2:36 PM, Mark Woodward wrote:

>>
>>> 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 ?
>
> And what if a particulr server goes down? or gets too high a
> percentage of
> the load?

Yes, I don't think that sticky sessions are the answer. But phps
session handling behavior could be greatly improved on.