All files from this thread

File Name	File Size		Posted by	Date
graph.png	56.2 KB	open | download	dbradfield	03/28/2013	Read message

> But I still cannot understand why, in 2013 and with the latest version of
> nginx, we would still need haproxy in front of it.

You don't need it is just a thing of preference or needs / that is also why
we don't have a single webserver or database server software.


But to name few advantages (at least for me) why I would use (and am doing
it) haproxy as a balancer - it has more refined backend
status/administrative page ( http://demo.1wt.eu/ (without the admin
features)).
The nginx upstream module is lacking in this area and for now (as far as I
know) you can only get info only via logging.

You have detailed information of what's up and what's down / how many
failures there have been. Also you can easily bring down any backends
without the need to change configuration (in case of nginx would need to
rewrite the config and do a reload).



> Even Varnish.. nginx can cache too.

As to varnish - I preffer the memory mapped file instead of nginx approach
of creating a file for each cachable object in filesystem.


rr

_______________________________________________
nginx mailing list
nginx@nginx.org
http://mailman.nginx.org/mailman/listinfo/nginx