On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 10:36:20AM -0500, Mike McGrath wrote: > So we've finally hit that tipping point in mod_cache where it's not quite > behaving correctly. So I've been looking at alternatives. For those not > familiar with the current setup (in order of processes) it goes: > > httpd(proxy) -> haproxy(proxy) -> httpd(app) > > The first two apps are both on the proxy servers, haproxy is our balancer > that sends it to httpd. > > I've been looking at a better proxy solution. I initially pushed back > against varnish because it would complicate the environment, and this will > but since apache isn't cutting it I figured a slow incremental change is > the best approach. So what I'm proposing is this: > > httpd(proxy) -> varnish(proxy) -> haproxy(proxy) -> httpd(app) +1. I agree with the reasoning and like the simplicity of being able to move varnish left or right in the above, if/when it's capable of serving those needs as well. -- Matt Domsch Technology Strategist Dell | Office of the CTO _______________________________________________ infrastructure mailing list infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/infrastructure
