[mapguide-internals] MapGuide RFC 42 - Remove Support Servers

[Zac Spitzer]

I'm not familiar with the structure of the tilecache, but would it make
sense to add support for it to MGP's ?

z

On Dec 7, 2007 10:38 AM, Trevor Wekel <trevor.wekel at autodesk.com> wrote:

> Hi Zac,
>
> MapGuide supports rudimentary load balancing and session affinity as
> described in "RFC3 - Session Affinity".  A single web extensions install can
> round robin between the site servers on multiple machines.
>
> http://trac.osgeo.org/mapguide/wiki/MapGuideRfc3
>
>
> The MGP's only contain Library:// and Site:// resources and their
> associated managed data.  Unmanaged folders and the tile cache are not
> included in the MGP.
>
> You are right on track with the rsync and hot backup.  If the site servers
> are running an identical configuration (directory paths, etc), then any sort
> of directory replication scheme would form the basis of site to site
> replication.  If you have $$$ for a SAN or NAS then replication becomes even
> easier (assuming everything is unmanaged data hosted on the SAN/NAS):
>
> "Master": Hot back up the repository from local disk to the SAN/NAS
> "Slave(s)": Shut down MapGuide Server
> "Slave(s)": Restore hot backup from SAN/NAS to local disk
> "Slave(s)": Restart MapGuide Server
> Done.
>
> All the data is on the SAN/NAS so it does not have to be replicated.  This
> becomes very interesting if you don't have terabytes of data and can afford
> to stick it all on an SSD (solid state disk).
>
> Thanks,
> Trevor
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: mapguide-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:
> mapguide-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Zac Spitzer
> Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2007 4:10 PM
> To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
> Subject: Re: [mapguide-internals] MapGuide RFC 42 - Remove Support Servers
>
> Ok it makes sense..... we will become more reliant on proxing a bit then.
>
> MGP's don't include the tile cache tho do they? is that do-able? I wish
> WMS
> would set a cache header...
>
> I would be nice to be able to define a master site servers (including
> unmanaged folders to be rsync-ed)
> and be able to push the config out from one master site server...
>
> should be pretty easy to script... hot back up the repository, rsync the
> unmanaged folders & tilecache (would that work?),
> shut down the slave site server, restore the hot back up, and bring it
> back
> up.
>
> z
>
> On Dec 7, 2007 4:13 AM, Trevor Wekel <trevor.wekel at autodesk.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Zac,
> >
> > Since the configuration of site and support servers is no longer
> possible
> > through the Site Administrator, this RFC effectively disables support
> server
> > functionality.
> >
> > I agree having multiple site repositories makes data management for load
> > balanced site servers more complex.  Packages (mgp files) can help
> alleviate
> > this problem if a "production" and "dev/test" environment are set up.
>  Only
> > the production setup would be load balanced.  Mgp's would be created in
> the
> > "dev/test" environment and deployed to the production site servers using
> an
> > mgp load.
> >
> > There are a couple of performance advantages to using load balanced site
> > servers versus site and support servers:
> >
> > 1.  All service to service traffic remains in process on the local
> > machine.
> >
> > A typical rendering service operation talks to the resource service and
> > feature service.  In a site server / support server setup, all of this
> > traffic will have to be serialized, transmitted over the wire, and
> > de-serialized.  This incurs significant overhead.
> >
> > The only way to get good performance on site/support server setup is to
> > have all of the services except resource service present on each support
> > server.  This also means the managed and unmanaged data files (SDF, SHP,
> > raster) must also be present on each support server.  So you end up
> > performing the data replication manually.
> >
> > 2.  Multiple site servers provide multiple session repositories.
> >
> > This is significant for higher user loads because the users are evenly
> > balanced over the available site servers.  It is similar to using a
> database
> > cluster that does not perform replication.
> >
> >
> > Does this help?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Trevor
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: mapguide-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:
> > mapguide-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Zac Spitzer
> > Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 6:24 PM
> > To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
> > Subject: Re: [mapguide-internals] MapGuide RFC 42 - Remove Support
> Servers
> >
> > "Load balanced site servers provide better scalability and easier
> > setup than separate site
> > and support servers. Furthermore, the site and support server concept
> > is confusing for the user base."
> >
> > How will this affect server admin?.... the support server (calling it
> > a Render Slave makes a lot more sense) approach
> > means you only need to maintain and update one repository.
> >
> > Having to maintain 6 site servers instead of 5 support servers and one
> > site server sounds like a backward step
> > in terms of maintainability.
> >
> > Renaming the support servers to something that provides more insight
> > into their function would be a good step.
> >
> > Also the RFC Title should specify that this is only at the MapGuide
> > Site Administrator level
> >
> > ie "Remove Support Servers from MapGuide Site Administrator"
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Zac
> >
> > On Dec 6, 2007 11:40 AM, Trevor Wekel <trevor.wekel at autodesk.com> wrote:
> > > I would like to submit "MapGuide RFC 42 - Remove Support Servers" to
> the
> > list for review and comment.  Please send your comments/concerns back to
> the
> > list and I will respond.
> > >
> > > http://trac.osgeo.org/mapguide/wiki/MapGuideRfc42
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Trevor Wekel
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > mapguide-internals mailing list
> > > mapguide-internals at lists.osgeo.org
> > > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Zac Spitzer -
> > http://zacster.blogspot.com (My Blog)
> > +61 405 847 168
> > _______________________________________________
> > mapguide-internals mailing list
> > mapguide-internals at lists.osgeo.org
> > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals
> > _______________________________________________
> > mapguide-internals mailing list
> > mapguide-internals at lists.osgeo.org
> > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Zac Spitzer -
> http://zacster.blogspot.com (My Blog)
> +61 405 847 168
> _______________________________________________
> mapguide-internals mailing list
> mapguide-internals at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals
> _______________________________________________
> mapguide-internals mailing list
> mapguide-internals at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals
>



-- 
Zac Spitzer -
http://zacster.blogspot.com (My Blog)
+61 405 847 168