On Tue, 18 Jul 2000, ethan mindlace fremen wrote:
Curtis Maloney wrote:
Yes, however his point is that by having each Zope instance 'predominantly' serving one portion of the site, its cache will contain more objects relevant, and thus be just that little bit faster.
Personally, I find this such a simple idea that it MUST be good. (o8 So much so, in fact, that I've decided to have a crack at writing just such a redirector. I feel the Zope world (and others, most likely) could benefit from a 'preferential' redirector.
The way I would do this is have
section1.contrived-example.com section2.contrived-example.com section3.contrived-example.com
with siteAccess, and then each zope would serve it according to it's IP (though each "could" serve each site). Then you can use whatever IP/DNS load balancing tool your heart desires.
I think most people seem to be missing the point here. The idea is that ALL servers can serve ALL content. HOWEVER, the 'load balancer' will opt for a certain server for a certain URL, in order to improve cache hits. So, for www.contrived-example.com/dir1 it will first try server1, but if it's busy (or down) it will try others. This way, the cache on server1 is more likely to contain objects relevant to /dir1 and thus have a higher hit rate, therefore improving performance. An enforced 'mapping', as you were suggesting, removes ALL redundancy from the site, but would likely provide even better cache hits.
a thought,
Have a better one, Curtis