[ic] IC on a cluster?
Mon, 30 Apr 2001 11:36:55 -0500 (CDT)
On Mon, 30 Apr 2001, Jud Harris wrote:
> Can anyone comment on why the docs for the SessionDB option say explicitly:
> "This is not recommended."
> It seems like a really great alternative to NFS mounting the session
> directory - why isn't it recommended?
That's been removed from the latest docs. The main reason it wasn't
recommended is that many people would automatically choose to put sessions
in SQL because they thought it was better, when it's actually worse for
the average case. But for load-balancing, it's a good option, with
NFS-mounted session files being the other. In any case, people changing
session setups should test and benchmark to make sure they know what
they're getting into ...