Persistence vs SH scheduler

[Martijn Grendelman]

Hi,

I was justing browsing the HOWTO, when I stumbled upon this recent piece 
of text:


Apr 2006: No-one has tried this, but it seems that the -SH scheduler 
could replace persistence without the failover problems of persistence. 
The -SH scheduler schedules according to the client IP, meaning that all 
of a client's connection requests will be sent to the same IP. The -SH 
scheduler has been around for a while, but it seems that no-one has 
known what it did.


When I first started to toy around with LVS, I did just what is written 
here: i tried to use the SH scheduler for "session affinity" at L7.

However, I had problems, that I posted to this list:

http://www.in-addr.de/pipermail/lvs-users/2004-March/011171.html

I never found a solution, and I finally decided that SH wasn't going to 
work, and I set up an Msession server for "session clustering" and used 
the RR scheduler. This setup works perfectly and is still in use today.

However, since Msession is hopelessly outdated, and its successor 
(Mcache) doesn't seem to get off the ground, and I haven't found any 
workable (open source) alternatives, I would really like have another 
look at LVS persistence of some sort.

The question is: has anything changed in the SH scheduler in the past 
two years, that could possibly have fixed the problems I ran into? I 
suspect, since only No-one has tried using it, there's not a big chance 
of that ;-)

Any thoughts?

Other suggestions, for example other session clustering solutions that 
are worth looking at, ar also welcome.

Best Regards,

No-one

a.k.a Martijn Grendelman