You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@tomcat.apache.org by Mladen Turk <mt...@mappingsoft.com> on 2003/01/22 21:13:05 UTC
[proposal] JK2 (WIN32) add dynamic load balancing
Hi guys,
It's been a long time :-).
I would like to add the dynamic load balancing to the existing one.
Since I know how to implement that only on WIN platform, I'll elaborate
that a bit.
The WIN32 has Performance Monitor that monitors server's activity. There
is also and interface to that using Registry functions, although the
data isn't really stored in the registry.
We could use those information to select the least loaded server as a
suitable worker.
I plan to add the extra file in common that will launch the performance
gatherer thread, that will loop through registered remote machines and
query the performance data.
Any suggestions or objections to that?
MT.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [proposal] JK2 (WIN32) add dynamic load balancing
Posted by Henri Gomez <hg...@apache.org>.
Mladen Turk wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> It's been a long time :-).
>
> I would like to add the dynamic load balancing to the existing one.
> Since I know how to implement that only on WIN platform, I'll elaborate
> that a bit.
>
> The WIN32 has Performance Monitor that monitors server's activity. There
> is also and interface to that using Registry functions, although the
> data isn't really stored in the registry.
> We could use those information to select the least loaded server as a
> suitable worker.
> I plan to add the extra file in common that will launch the performance
> gatherer thread, that will loop through registered remote machines and
> query the performance data.
>
> Any suggestions or objections to that?
+0 (entousiast but too busy).
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: [proposal] JK2 (WIN32) add dynamic load balancing
Posted by Costin Manolache <cm...@yahoo.com>.
Mladen Turk wrote:
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> >
>> > The WIN32 has Performance Monitor that monitors server's activity.
>> > There is also and interface to that using Registry
>> functions, although
>> > the data isn't really stored in the registry. We could use those
>> > information to select the least loaded server as a suitable worker.
>> > I plan to add the extra file in common that will launch the
>> performance
>> > gatherer thread, that will loop through registered remote
>> machines and
>> > query the performance data.
>> >
>> > Any suggestions or objections to that?
>>
>> Big +1
>>
>> I think it can be done on Unix ( or Linux at least ), probably an
>> "interface" would be the best solution ( i.e. a struct with function
>> pointers ).
>>
>> How do you plan to send back the data ? As part of the
>> response ? Maybe as a special header ?
>>
>> Costin
>
> Well, the data channel isn't issue in that case (on WIN32<->WIN32... )
> cause I'm querying the OS not the TC itself.
> If the *NIX has some sort of RPC for querying it's status we can use
> that, filling some struct or something like that.
Wouldn't be better to make it OS-independent ? Just create a special
handler ( "GetLoadHandler" ), and make a Jk request. Then you can have
any frontent query any worker.
It seems much cleaner than using Win32->Win32 RPC calls.
SNMP is another way to do this - but it would be far more complex
( not to mention security issues, etc ).
> Other solution would be to make an extra channel that will gather those
> params (if we can get system load params with pure Java) from inside TC.
I don't think you need an extra channel - you can make a "regular" request,
that will be dispatched to a special "load" handler.
But it seems the extra channel is mentioned often enough and would simplify
some things - so it may be time to add it.
I would do it with the "easy" solution first ( IMO the jk handler + ajp
request is the easiest ).
Costin
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: [proposal] JK2 (WIN32) add dynamic load balancing
Posted by Mladen Turk <mt...@mappingsoft.com>.
> -----Original Message-----
> >
> > The WIN32 has Performance Monitor that monitors server's activity.
> > There is also and interface to that using Registry
> functions, although
> > the data isn't really stored in the registry. We could use those
> > information to select the least loaded server as a suitable worker.
> > I plan to add the extra file in common that will launch the
> performance
> > gatherer thread, that will loop through registered remote
> machines and
> > query the performance data.
> >
> > Any suggestions or objections to that?
>
> Big +1
>
> I think it can be done on Unix ( or Linux at least ), probably an
> "interface" would be the best solution ( i.e. a struct with function
> pointers ).
>
> How do you plan to send back the data ? As part of the
> response ? Maybe as a special header ?
>
> Costin
Well, the data channel isn't issue in that case (on WIN32<->WIN32... )
cause I'm querying the OS not the TC itself.
If the *NIX has some sort of RPC for querying it's status we can use
that, filling some struct or something like that.
Other solution would be to make an extra channel that will gather those
params (if we can get system load params with pure Java) from inside TC.
MT.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [proposal] JK2 (WIN32) add dynamic load balancing
Posted by Costin Manolache <cm...@yahoo.com>.
Mladen Turk wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> It's been a long time :-).
>
> I would like to add the dynamic load balancing to the existing one.
> Since I know how to implement that only on WIN platform, I'll elaborate
> that a bit.
>
> The WIN32 has Performance Monitor that monitors server's activity. There
> is also and interface to that using Registry functions, although the
> data isn't really stored in the registry.
> We could use those information to select the least loaded server as a
> suitable worker.
> I plan to add the extra file in common that will launch the performance
> gatherer thread, that will loop through registered remote machines and
> query the performance data.
>
> Any suggestions or objections to that?
Big +1
I think it can be done on Unix ( or Linux at least ), probably an
"interface" would be the best solution ( i.e. a struct with function
pointers ).
How do you plan to send back the data ? As part of the response ? Maybe
as a special header ?
Costin
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>