On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 11:03 PM, David M. Lloyd <david.lloyd@redhat.com> wrote:
Getting transactions and SFSB to share a load-balancing behavior will
hopefully be possible though.  I guess it'll require some thought to
make it easy to avoid situations where (for example) two SFSB are spread
to different nodes and then you try to create a UserTransaction which
includes both.

Once you start using a SFSB or a Transaction you should get a session cookie, which should give you affinity to the relevant node (based on the assumption the load balancer supports sticky sessions).


On 05/04/2016 05:36 AM, Stuart Douglas wrote:
> The purpose is to enable load balancer based clustering to work.
> Basically even though there is no underlying web session the JSESSIONID
> cookie will make sure that the load balancer delivers the request to the
> correct backend server.
> Basically existing load balancers already support sticky sessions, and
> we are just piggy backing on that, as the primary customer use case for
> this is allowing EJB calls through a HTTP load balancer.
> Stuart
> On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 7:56 PM, Tomaž Cerar <tomaz.cerar@gmail.com
> <mailto:tomaz.cerar@gmail.com>> wrote:
>     One thing that seems somewhat odd to me is the usage of JSESSIONID
>     for tracking session state.
>     That cookie/param is used for servlet http sessions and given that
>     this is pure EJB without any servlets
>     it would be bit confusing to require it. Or will this rely on
>     session tracking from undertow-servlet?
>     --
>     tomaz
>     On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 7:50 AM, Stuart Douglas
>     <stuart.w.douglas@gmail.com <mailto:stuart.w.douglas@gmail.com>> wrote:
>         Hi everyone,
>         I have started looking into support for service invocation over
>         HTTP. Unlike our existing HTTP upgrade support this will map EJB
>         requests/responses directly to HTTP requests and responses,
>         which should allow it to be used behind existing load balancers.
>         I have started an initial description of the protocol at:
>         https://github.com/stuartwdouglas/wildfly-http-client/blob/master/docs/wire-spec-v1.asciidoc
>         The intention is to follow HTTP semantics as closely as
>         possible. Clustering will be provided in a similar manner to web
>         clustering (i.e. it will require a load balancer, and work in a
>         similar manner to web clustering).
>         There is still plenty work that needs to be done (especially
>         around security), so if anyone has any feedback let me know.
>         Stuart
>         _______________________________________________
>         wildfly-dev mailing list
>         wildfly-dev@lists.jboss.org <mailto:wildfly-dev@lists.jboss.org>
>         https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev
> _______________________________________________
> wildfly-dev mailing list
> wildfly-dev@lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev

wildfly-dev mailing list