|
Yes gut reaction is that one device not being used except for failover
is wrong...
But when you think about what you are doing why does it matter ?
A PIII 500 with 512MB RAM can handle much more bandwidth than most web
sites (certainly a simple 2 server set up)
So why bother making the failover active when it just involves
complications ?
Also if you think you need the power of two load balancers to run the
site , then what happens if one fails ?
Maybe you need three ?
Commercial active/active scenarios I have seen need a separate
VIP/Cluster serviced by each load balancer and on failover the second
load balancer takes over all of the VIPs...
But I don't mind being told I'm wrong, I usually am :-0
Regards,
Malcolm Turnbull.
Loadbalancer.org Limited
+44 (0)7715 770523
http://www.loadbalancer.org/
" When a single point of failure is not an option"
Why not try our online demonstration
<http://www.loadbalancer.org/demo.html> ? Or get answers to common
questions <http://www.loadbalancer.org/fud.html> ?
Martijn Vogel wrote:
Hi list,
I am setting up a LVS-cluster using 2 directors and 2 real-servers and 1
fileserver (for the time being). I've read a lot of the available
documentation and went along with the LVS-NAT setup using active/stand-by
directors.
Since the task of the cluster is going to be webhosting I would like to use
2 VIPs on the directors. As most of you know, at least 2 IPs are necessary
for nameservers. I think it's a waste of resources to have one director
stand-by, but the available active/active setups are rather difficult (using
Horms method of 1 IP on 2 machines having same MAC etc.). Thinking of this I
came up with an idea I'd like to verify with all you professionals in LVS:
- set up 2 IP's as VIP, first VIP is primarily on director 1 (a heartbeat
resource), the other VIP is primarily on director 2 (also heartbeat
resource).
- set up every DNS A-record twice, once for VIP1 and once for VIP2 (looks
like DNS round-robin, does it ?)
If director 1 goes down, the VIP that is primarily a resource on this
director is moved to director 2. Likewise, if director 2 goes down, director
1 takes over its IP.
Will this setup work with LVS-modules, ipvsadm?
Thanks in advance for your responses.
Martijn
_______________________________________________
LinuxVirtualServer.org mailing list - lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Send requests to lvs-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
or go to http://www.in-addr.de/mailman/listinfo/lvs-users
|
