silly question, but maybe not, if you are running ...
# luceet
tigeryan
09/21/2024, 2:55 AMsilly question, but maybe not, if you are running in a docker setup, with lucee running as one image and then web server in another docker image, could you run two web servers to one lucee server or more webs to a single lucee?
b
bdw429s
09/21/2024, 2:59 AMAdd "more webs"? I don't follow.
t
tigeryan
09/21/2024, 2:59 AMI am thinking 3 docker images that are the web servers all pointed at a single docker image running lucee
b
bdw429s
09/21/2024, 3:00 AMBut.. why?
bdw429s
09/21/2024, 3:01 AMYes, that could work. I'm just not understanding the use case
t
tigeryan
09/21/2024, 3:01 AMnot 100% sure the why, but just thinking about something someone else said and thought to myself, that should work, not sure what you gain, just a thought after a long week
tigeryan
09/21/2024, 3:02 AM12 work days in a row, brain working but with bourbon now....
q
quetwo
09/21/2024, 6:33 AMI don't see why it wouldn't work. You may have issues across sessions and maybe some CRFS issues, but it /should/ work.
s
sknowlton
09/21/2024, 7:45 PMWe found that it wasn't really worth containerizing nginx. A small VM running nginx is enough to handle traffic and proxying for multiple containers
r
rodyon
09/22/2024, 4:27 PMi.e. [nginx box] -> reverse proxy to [docker1 lucee]... [docker2 lucee] ?
s
sknowlton
09/22/2024, 10:01 PMYup
sknowlton
09/22/2024, 10:02 PMThe point of containerizing something for us is to make it replicable and scalable. Both things that matter for our main app. NGINX doesn't need to be replicable and is already scalable just with increased VM resources (the point where you'd need a cluster of nginx servers on multiple high-end VMs ... is the point where somebody smarter than me is being paid to worry about it)