Re: Real Servers listening on different port numbers.

To: copeland@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Real Servers listening on different port numbers.
Cc: lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: Pietro Ravasio <pietro.ravasio@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 18:23:42 +0200
At 10.07 28/08/00 -0500, you wrote:

Hi Phil!

Umm submitting it as a feature/bug report on bugzilla?

Well, it didn't look like a bug to me... So I didn't want to offend anybody posting on bugzilla! :)

That wasn't a 'feature' I thought sane people would want
however, I'll go off and make the necessary changes in the near future

Thank you VERY much! :) You're going to solve me a lot of troubles!

Features only get added when people suggest them, I get precious little feedback

Well, this ML is for suggestion too, isn't it?

so your suggestion has become a requirement that will be added soon. Though you
antagonise me and drop it in bugzilla (hint hint!) With luck that looks like
something I *might*
be able to code up buy middle next week.

Well, I'll wait for your precious "feature update", I've tried to write the code for myself on top of piranha sources, but it was not as easy as I was supposing...

Thank you very much for your WONDERFUL support, I'm looking forward for good news! :)

Pietro Ravasio

P.S.: I suggest to treat each server/port couple as a single real server, this way you can dinamically add/remove a bunch of real server maybe running on the same IP (I'm going to run at least 20 application gateways connecting to the main Database Server on the same phisical server! (I don't have time to rewrite my application gateway to let it use threads, and using LVS with multiple ports I can avoid queing a lot of clients' connection requests adding parallelism (and using a few PCs)).

P.P.S.: another hint: why don't you add failover policies (start-stop commands (script or whatever)) to be executed on a remote machine on a per-real server basis on a "service failed" event? This way if an LVS monitorized server falls down you can start a script that tries to start it up again! (You certainly have already understood that my application gateway is not inetd-driven! :PP )

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>