LVS
lvs-users
Google
 
Web LinuxVirtualServer.org

Re: LVS vs Piranha

To: Keith Barrett <kbarrett@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: LVS vs Piranha
Cc: "David D.W. Downey" <david.downey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Andreas J. Koenig" <andreas.koenig@xxxxxxxx>, Anmol Sheth <anmol@xxxxxxxx>, lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: "David D.W. Downey" <david.downey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 02:29:29 -0500 (CDT)




On Mon, 11 Sep 2000, Keith Barrett wrote:

> Piranha and ultramonkey provide the same services, except that:
> 
Not true. UM actually works

> 
> 2. piranha monitors the services in failover mode, in addition to the server
>    heartbeats.
when the lvs daemona ctually gets handed off the config like it's supposed
to. Seems lvs doesn't know hwo to read what nanny passes on to it most of
the time.

Though testing exactly where lvs is choking is made rather difficult since
passing nanny the -v switch to get verbose messages is a pain in the butt.
 

> 4. Piranha (when purchased as part of the HA Server product), comes with
>    24x7 phone support.
> 
Yeah. as in configuration, and administration. The problem there is
that the things the 24x7 support covers are things like "I've never
used LVS before and I need to know what application to run to see the
piranha web interface." but if you find a problem in the functionality be
prepared to pay extra for a development contract to fix the problem.
 The support doesn't go anywhere towards actually fixing a broken config,
only fixing user knowledge of how to run the frontend.


-- 
David D.W. Downey
Systems Administrator
RHCE, CUA/CLA
Internet Security Specialist
QIXO.com




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