You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@tomcat.apache.org by Antonio Fiol Bonnín <fi...@terra.es> on 2004/02/04 20:31:19 UTC
mod_jk as a load balancer - Am I missing something obvious?
Hello,
I have tried to configure mod_jk as a load balancer WITH sticky sessions.
I get the load balancing to work perfectly, but NOT the sticky sessions.
This is what I tried:
I set up 4 "ajp13" workers and 2 "lb" workers.
Worker names are "t1_a", "t1_b", "t2_a" and "t2_b".
Load balancer names are "a" and "b", and they point to:
"a" --> "t1_a", "t2_a"
"b" --> "t1_b", "t2_b"
t1_a --> tomcat 1 port X
t1_b --> tomcat 1 port Y
t2_a --> tomcat 2 port X
t2_b --> tomcat 2 port Y
On Tomcat 1, jvmRoute is "t1".
On Tomcat 2, jvmRoute is "t2". (So, jvmRoutes are set-up).
Am I missing something very obvious?
Do jvmRoutes need to have the same name as the workers? I find that
strange, but I can't come up with something more logical...
Thank you for any tip.
Yours,
Antonio Fiol
P.S.: I am using two connectors on each Tomcat because one is configured
with scheme="http" secure="false", and the other is scheme="https"
secure="true". Our app relies upon that.
Re: mod_jk as a load balancer - Am I missing something obvious?
Posted by Daniel <da...@yorku.ca>.
Hi,
You can try out these step-by-step instructions:
http://www.yorku.ca/dkha/tomcat/docs/apache-tomcat-modjk.htm
Regards,
Daniel
On Wed, 4 Feb 2004, [ISO-8859-1] Antonio Fiol Bonn�n wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have tried to configure mod_jk as a load balancer WITH sticky sessions.
>
> I get the load balancing to work perfectly, but NOT the sticky sessions.
>
> This is what I tried:
>
> I set up 4 "ajp13" workers and 2 "lb" workers.
>
> Worker names are "t1_a", "t1_b", "t2_a" and "t2_b".
> Load balancer names are "a" and "b", and they point to:
> "a" --> "t1_a", "t2_a"
> "b" --> "t1_b", "t2_b"
>
> t1_a --> tomcat 1 port X
> t1_b --> tomcat 1 port Y
> t2_a --> tomcat 2 port X
> t2_b --> tomcat 2 port Y
>
> On Tomcat 1, jvmRoute is "t1".
> On Tomcat 2, jvmRoute is "t2". (So, jvmRoutes are set-up).
>
> Am I missing something very obvious?
>
> Do jvmRoutes need to have the same name as the workers? I find that
> strange, but I can't come up with something more logical...
>
> Thank you for any tip.
>
> Yours,
>
>
> Antonio Fiol
>
>
> P.S.: I am using two connectors on each Tomcat because one is configured
> with scheme="http" secure="false", and the other is scheme="https"
> secure="true". Our app relies upon that.
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tomcat-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tomcat-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: mod_jk as a load balancer - Am I missing something obvious?
Posted by Antonio Fiol Bonnín <fi...@terra.es>.
Thank you, Dave.
>>Do jvmRoutes need to have the same name as the workers?
>>
>>
>Yes, they do.
>
>
Then that means I cannot have two AJP connectors on each Tomcat.
Proposed setup is, then:
Worker names are "t1" and "t2"
Load balancer name is "t":
t --> t1, t2
t1 --> tomcat 1 port X (jvmRoute="t1")
t2 --> tomcat 2 port X (jvmRoute="t2")
On Apache I have:
<VirtualHost hostname:80>
...
JkMount /myapp/* t
#was "a"
</VirtualHost>
<VirtualHost hostname:443>
...
JkMount /myapp/* t
#was "b"
</VirtualHost>
Or, if we remove the hassle of load balancing, I can just "JkMount
/myapp/* t1", which is what I initially had (several months ago). But
then...
How do I get request.isSecure() and request.getScheme() working
properly? I.e. How can I detect whether the user is coming in through
HTTP or HTTPS? They ALWAYS return "false" and "http" respectively,
regardless of what protocol the user used.
Previously, I did it by adding secure="true" scheme="https" to one
connector on each Tomcat. Now I cannot, as I only have one connector!!
Thank you for any further guidance.
Antonio Fiol
Re: mod_jk as a load balancer - Am I missing something obvious?
Posted by David Rees <dr...@greenhydrant.com>.
On Wed, February 4, 2004 1at 1:31 am, Antonio Fiol Bonnín wrote:
> Am I missing something very obvious?
>
> Do jvmRoutes need to have the same name as the workers? I find that
> strange, but I can't come up with something more logical...
Yes, they do.
-Dave
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: tomcat-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: tomcat-user-help@jakarta.apache.org