lvs-users
|
To: | "'lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx'" <lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
---|---|
Subject: | LVS, mon, and heartbeat, who's in control? |
From: | Paul Lantinga <prl@xxxxxx> |
Date: | Wed, 30 Jan 2002 11:22:12 -0500 |
Good morning, We're running the .8.x stable code. It works great in the default setup with one LVS server doing NAT. Phase II means trying out 2 load balancers, as found at http://www.linuxvirtualserver.org/HighAvailability.html. This works fine using heartbeat to control lvs and mon in the manner found in the example haresources file. clients -- switch -- lvs and lvs2 -- switch -- servers
Of course, this killfest doesn't work b/c you can't have mon killing heartbeat and heartbeat killing mon as you're left with noone watching anything. ;) . So, I figured, how about having two mon instances or how about having mon control both heartbeat and lvs. The dual mon setup would be:
- a second instance of mon would be started at boot time and would monitor the gateways hostgroup using a mon.cf with:
watch gateways
The mon in control scenario would be:
Is either of these methods preferable? wise? unwise? Has anyone else managed to get 2 instances of mon running on the same box? Is anyone using mon to control heartbeat and lvs? thanks, Paul L. |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | RE: lvs-nat & SNAT, Julian Anastasov |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: LVS, mon, and heartbeat, who's in control?, Joseph Mack |
Previous by Thread: | Multiple routing types in one lvs?, Michael Cunningham |
Next by Thread: | Re: LVS, mon, and heartbeat, who's in control?, Joseph Mack |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |