Page 2 of 2

Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2006 5:26 pm
by BDKR
arborint wrote: I'm quite suprised that people do not associate "share-nothing" with PHP. Rasmus Lerdorf has been refering to it as such for a while:

http://www.oracle.com/technology/pub/ar ... _php.html]
http://itconversations.com/shows/detail58.html
http://techpatterns.com/forums/about567.html
http://www.zefhemel.com/archives/2004/0 ... chitecture
What was described above in the zefhemel.com article is what I described above. That article is dated in 2004. I built this cluster back in late '01 into '02. The idea of "Shared Nothing" was the ONLY LOGICAL SOLUTION in a stateless environment. The term "Shared Nothing" came up after the fact, much the same way AJAX did.

Additionally, you could take this approach in any language. The reason it may be percieved as a PHP thing is because of Rasmus and others talking about as well as how others (as in differring programming communities) are accustomed to dealing with session data. We were doing it with PHP and VB. The VB transaction servers (this was a real time lottery operation in South America BTW) stored their session info in the DB as well.

Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2006 7:06 pm
by Christopher
It is my impression that "Shared-Nothing" as it applies to PHP is a slight expansion to how it is used regarding clustering. For PHP there is this idea of an architecture that is different than the application server solution that Java popularized. With PHP the attitude is: if you want to cluster use Scyld or one of the many other clustering solutions; if you want directory services to scale use LDAP; if you want DB sessions to scale use Oracle. The idea being that you push the scaling bottleneck out to proven solutions like Oracle or Scyld so you are, in essence, not limited. This is different from the Java approach where they have Java middleware for every problem.

My experience is that neither is better -- they are just different.