There's a minimum of 4 Http Requests. There is about 6 SQL queries to
load a user. So, if there is 2 nodes, you have minimum 12 queries for
an uncached user. It really all depends how big the cache can be.
Couldn't a million users be cached on a pretty inexpensive box? My
laptop has 32 gig ram. 10K per user is 10 gigs for a million users.
Then, depending on UserSession ownership setting, you have
pulling/grabbing/replication of the client sessions as you hop between
nodes. This is the one that can't be fixed. I don't know how much of a
big deal it is.
On 3/4/2016 10:18 AM, Stian Thorgersen wrote:
Users are cached so that helps + it's possible to load balance
based
on source address. Do you really think that a lot of people will run
that many nodes in either case?
On 4 March 2016 at 14:52, Bill Burke <bburke(a)redhat.com
<mailto:bburke@redhat.com>> wrote:
I"m not sure how well keycloak would scale without this.
On 3/4/2016 7:15 AM, Stian Thorgersen wrote:
> Eventually it would be nice to support the ability for load
> balancers to send all requests for a particular user session to
> the same node (browser as well as client requests).
>
> More details here:
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/KEYCLOAK-2352
>
> Is this a high priority for 1.9 or should it be 2.x? We may be
> able to put it into 1.9.2 if required.
>
> I'd like feedback on how useful folks think it would be as well
> as feedback on the proposed implementation.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> keycloak-user mailing list
> keycloak-user(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:keycloak-user@lists.jboss.org>
>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-user
--
Bill Burke
JBoss, a division of Red Hat
http://bill.burkecentral.com
_______________________________________________
keycloak-user mailing list
keycloak-user(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:keycloak-user@lists.jboss.org>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-user
--
Bill Burke
JBoss, a division of Red Hat
http://bill.burkecentral.com