Ryfujk

How to count occurrences of text in a file?

Axiom Schema vs Axiom

When you upcast Blindness/Deafness, do all targets suffer the same effect?

Why does standard notation not preserve intervals (visually)

How to check if all elements of 1 list are in the *same quantity* and in any order, in the list2?

Is it convenient to ask the journal's editor for two additional days to complete a review?

Is there a way to save my career from absolute disaster?

Would a completely good Muggle be able to use a wand?

Bartok - Syncopation (1): Meaning of notes in between Grand Staff

Domestic-to-international connection at Orlando (MCO)

How many extra stops do monopods offer for tele photographs?

Why don't programming languages automatically manage the synchronous/asynchronous problem?

Is it professional to write unrelated content in an almost-empty email?

How do I align (1) and (2)?

Does increasing your ability score affect your main stat?

Does Germany produce more waste than the US?

What was the first Unix version to run on a microcomputer?

What is the value of α and β in a triangle?

Method for adding error messages to a dictionary given a key

A Man With a Stainless Steel Endoskeleton (like The Terminator) Fighting Cloaked Aliens Only He Can See

Is wanting to ask what to write an indication that you need to change your story?

What flight has the highest ratio of time difference to flight time?

Reference request: Grassmannian and Plucker coordinates in type B, C, D

Why doesn't UK go for the same deal Japan has with EU to resolve Brexit?

Load balancing architecture: sticky sessions and dynamic backends

1

1

I'm struggling to find a solution to a specific load balancing requirement. It seems that various combinations of HAProxy, Nginx, Varnish and Apache's mod_proxy_balancer can do some but not all of what we need. My question is whether anyone can suggest a suitable configuration that would (perhaps including software that we may not have considered, but it will need to be FOSS).

The key requirement is, unfortunately, sticky sessions. We have a large, complex Tomcat app that somewhat abuses the HTTP Session, and it utilises frameworks that do the same. Converting to a stateless design or replicated session have both been investigated and discounted. Additionally, the stickiness MUST be based on a cookie and not an IP hash as we have large spikes from corporate clients where many thousands of users can all appear to be hitting the site at the same time from the same IP address.

Second most important requirement is a dynamic backend. This application runs in a cloud (not AWS) and app servers come and go from time to time based on automatic or manual scaling.

Thirdly, we need to be able to mark servers as "quiescing" so that they will continue to honour existing sessions but will not be handed new ones. When all current sessions end, the server can be turned off or upgraded/restarted.

There are some additional complications/requirements but it's meeting the three above that seems to be presenting the most difficulty.

From research so far, I think the following statements are true:

• Nginx/Varnish can't meet the sticky session requirement (based on cookies) but HAProxy and Apache can


• HAProxy can't do dynamic backend modification without a restart (might be ok if it's quick though). Varnish can with some VCL changes and a HUP, as could Nginx with some creative config file management I think. Apache can possibly handle this via a managed interface to mod_proxy_balancer..?


• I'm not sure if/how any of them can deal with the third requirement

Would really appreciate any pointers or insights.

linux load-balancing cloud

share|improve this question

asked Jan 18 '14 at 21:05

darrenddarrend

1212

bumped to the homepage by Community♦ 10 mins ago

This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.

add a comment | 

1

1

I'm struggling to find a solution to a specific load balancing requirement. It seems that various combinations of HAProxy, Nginx, Varnish and Apache's mod_proxy_balancer can do some but not all of what we need. My question is whether anyone can suggest a suitable configuration that would (perhaps including software that we may not have considered, but it will need to be FOSS).

The key requirement is, unfortunately, sticky sessions. We have a large, complex Tomcat app that somewhat abuses the HTTP Session, and it utilises frameworks that do the same. Converting to a stateless design or replicated session have both been investigated and discounted. Additionally, the stickiness MUST be based on a cookie and not an IP hash as we have large spikes from corporate clients where many thousands of users can all appear to be hitting the site at the same time from the same IP address.

Second most important requirement is a dynamic backend. This application runs in a cloud (not AWS) and app servers come and go from time to time based on automatic or manual scaling.

Thirdly, we need to be able to mark servers as "quiescing" so that they will continue to honour existing sessions but will not be handed new ones. When all current sessions end, the server can be turned off or upgraded/restarted.

There are some additional complications/requirements but it's meeting the three above that seems to be presenting the most difficulty.

From research so far, I think the following statements are true:

• Nginx/Varnish can't meet the sticky session requirement (based on cookies) but HAProxy and Apache can


• HAProxy can't do dynamic backend modification without a restart (might be ok if it's quick though). Varnish can with some VCL changes and a HUP, as could Nginx with some creative config file management I think. Apache can possibly handle this via a managed interface to mod_proxy_balancer..?


• I'm not sure if/how any of them can deal with the third requirement

Would really appreciate any pointers or insights.

linux load-balancing cloud

share|improve this question

asked Jan 18 '14 at 21:05

darrenddarrend

1212

bumped to the homepage by Community♦ 10 mins ago

This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.

add a comment | 

I'm struggling to find a solution to a specific load balancing requirement. It seems that various combinations of HAProxy, Nginx, Varnish and Apache's mod_proxy_balancer can do some but not all of what we need. My question is whether anyone can suggest a suitable configuration that would (perhaps including software that we may not have considered, but it will need to be FOSS).

The key requirement is, unfortunately, sticky sessions. We have a large, complex Tomcat app that somewhat abuses the HTTP Session, and it utilises frameworks that do the same. Converting to a stateless design or replicated session have both been investigated and discounted. Additionally, the stickiness MUST be based on a cookie and not an IP hash as we have large spikes from corporate clients where many thousands of users can all appear to be hitting the site at the same time from the same IP address.

Second most important requirement is a dynamic backend. This application runs in a cloud (not AWS) and app servers come and go from time to time based on automatic or manual scaling.

Thirdly, we need to be able to mark servers as "quiescing" so that they will continue to honour existing sessions but will not be handed new ones. When all current sessions end, the server can be turned off or upgraded/restarted.

There are some additional complications/requirements but it's meeting the three above that seems to be presenting the most difficulty.

From research so far, I think the following statements are true:

• Nginx/Varnish can't meet the sticky session requirement (based on cookies) but HAProxy and Apache can


• HAProxy can't do dynamic backend modification without a restart (might be ok if it's quick though). Varnish can with some VCL changes and a HUP, as could Nginx with some creative config file management I think. Apache can possibly handle this via a managed interface to mod_proxy_balancer..?


• I'm not sure if/how any of them can deal with the third requirement

Would really appreciate any pointers or insights.

linux load-balancing cloud

share|improve this question

asked Jan 18 '14 at 21:05

darrenddarrend

1212

share|improve this question

asked Jan 18 '14 at 21:05

darrenddarrend

1212

share|improve this question

asked Jan 18 '14 at 21:05

darrenddarrend

1212

asked Jan 18 '14 at 21:05

darrenddarrend

1212

asked Jan 18 '14 at 21:05

darrenddarrend

1212

1 Answer
1

active

oldest

votes

0

With HAProxy you can add the whole range of possible backend servers and then turn them on and off (hard or soft) using the admin pages/socket calls.

How does that not fit your requirements?

share|improve this answer

answered Jan 19 '14 at 2:12

JamesRyanJamesRyan

7,78322036

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Servers brought online will get a DHCP address from a /24, so adding 256 addresses as backends with about 250 disabled most of the time was not the most obvious thing to think of. There was also no description of whether disabling servers allows them to receive requests with valid persistence cookies here, which I had already read: cbonte.github.io/haproxy-dconv/configuration-1.4.html#9.2 I have now found it elsewhere in the docs, so yes, looks like it would be an option.. I'll try it over the next day or so. Thx.
  
  – darrend
  Jan 19 '14 at 10:15
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  hrm yeah, that does sound a bit unmanageable. No way you can narrow the range to what you expect to scale to?
  
  – JamesRyan
  Jan 19 '14 at 13:16
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  If it looks viable in all other respects, then yes, I can create a smaller address pool and ensure that our cloud API calls are aware of how to choose a pool when creating a new server.
  
  – darrend
  Jan 19 '14 at 16:46
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

Your Answer

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "2"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});

draft saved

draft discarded

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});

Sign up using Google

Sign up using Facebook

Sign up using Email and Password

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fserverfault.com%2fquestions%2f568253%2fload-balancing-architecture-sticky-sessions-and-dynamic-backends%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

0

With HAProxy you can add the whole range of possible backend servers and then turn them on and off (hard or soft) using the admin pages/socket calls.

How does that not fit your requirements?

share|improve this answer

answered Jan 19 '14 at 2:12

JamesRyanJamesRyan

7,78322036

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Servers brought online will get a DHCP address from a /24, so adding 256 addresses as backends with about 250 disabled most of the time was not the most obvious thing to think of. There was also no description of whether disabling servers allows them to receive requests with valid persistence cookies here, which I had already read: cbonte.github.io/haproxy-dconv/configuration-1.4.html#9.2 I have now found it elsewhere in the docs, so yes, looks like it would be an option.. I'll try it over the next day or so. Thx.
  
  – darrend
  Jan 19 '14 at 10:15
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  hrm yeah, that does sound a bit unmanageable. No way you can narrow the range to what you expect to scale to?
  
  – JamesRyan
  Jan 19 '14 at 13:16
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  If it looks viable in all other respects, then yes, I can create a smaller address pool and ensure that our cloud API calls are aware of how to choose a pool when creating a new server.
  
  – darrend
  Jan 19 '14 at 16:46
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

0

With HAProxy you can add the whole range of possible backend servers and then turn them on and off (hard or soft) using the admin pages/socket calls.

How does that not fit your requirements?

share|improve this answer

answered Jan 19 '14 at 2:12

JamesRyanJamesRyan

7,78322036

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Servers brought online will get a DHCP address from a /24, so adding 256 addresses as backends with about 250 disabled most of the time was not the most obvious thing to think of. There was also no description of whether disabling servers allows them to receive requests with valid persistence cookies here, which I had already read: cbonte.github.io/haproxy-dconv/configuration-1.4.html#9.2 I have now found it elsewhere in the docs, so yes, looks like it would be an option.. I'll try it over the next day or so. Thx.
  
  – darrend
  Jan 19 '14 at 10:15
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  hrm yeah, that does sound a bit unmanageable. No way you can narrow the range to what you expect to scale to?
  
  – JamesRyan
  Jan 19 '14 at 13:16
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  If it looks viable in all other respects, then yes, I can create a smaller address pool and ensure that our cloud API calls are aware of how to choose a pool when creating a new server.
  
  – darrend
  Jan 19 '14 at 16:46
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

With HAProxy you can add the whole range of possible backend servers and then turn them on and off (hard or soft) using the admin pages/socket calls.

How does that not fit your requirements?

share|improve this answer

answered Jan 19 '14 at 2:12

JamesRyanJamesRyan

7,78322036

share|improve this answer

answered Jan 19 '14 at 2:12

JamesRyanJamesRyan

7,78322036

answered Jan 19 '14 at 2:12

JamesRyanJamesRyan

7,78322036

answered Jan 19 '14 at 2:12

JamesRyanJamesRyan

7,78322036