LVS
lvs-users
Google
 
Web LinuxVirtualServer.org

Re: Questions about LVS-TUN

To: "LinuxVirtualServer.org users mailing list." <lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Questions about LVS-TUN
From: Joseph Mack NA3T <jmack@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 11:27:52 -0800 (PST)
On Tue, 12 Dec 2006, Bill Omer wrote:

*Should* be ran, yes, I agree.  However I did run in to a situation
where this did happen, which is far from the fault of lvs its self,
but it is reasoning for why I want to find a new solution.

I don't know your situation, but I expect fixing the original problem will be simpler. You shouldn't be trying to run LVS on a machine in an invalid state.

rr helps here. Still the thundering herd problem has to be
handled in user space (until someone writes a fix).

Implementing LVS in this environment was to get around using DNS based
Round Robin, so this would be counter productive.

the problem with DNS based load balancing is the long time scale of DNS, not the round robin part.

Traffic does go to the realservers, but the DST is that of the VIP.
There has to be modifications to the realserver in order for it to
accept that traffic.

you have one realserver, or many? If one, just let it have the VIP. If many, do you want all of them to have the VIP?

Joe

--
Joseph Mack NA3T EME(B,D), FM05lw North Carolina
jmack (at) wm7d (dot) net - azimuthal equidistant map
generator at http://www.wm7d.net/azproj.shtml
Homepage http://www.austintek.com/ It's GNU/Linux!

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