LVS
lvs-users
Google
 
Web LinuxVirtualServer.org

Re: persistence

To: "LinuxVirtualServer.org users mailing list." <lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: persistence
From: Graeme Fowler <graeme@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 22:05:29 +0100
On Wed, 2005-03-30 at 13:56 -0600, Casey Zacek wrote:
> Anyone got any clues?  Anyone need more information?  I have a
> customer anxiously awaiting a resolution.

I know that feeling... :-S

Output from "ipvsadm -L -n" would be useful (you sent that already), as
would your keepalived configs (suitably anonymised). I'm guessing that
the patch you mention was actually sent to the keepalived-users list,
not this one, and was the one for healthchecking Win2K/IIS+Coldfusion;
not that healthchecking has an enormous amount to do directly with the
way your LVS gets set up...

I'm just checking back on your posts from earlier, you say:

> I'm also using keepalived, and the ipvsadm -ln output looks correct:
> 
> TCP  VIP:0 wlc persistent 7200
>   -> RIP2:0             Tunnel  50     39         693
>   -> RIP1:0             Tunnel  50     44         601

One thing worth bearing in mind there is your use of "port 0". I'm using
specific application ports in my LVS (80 and 443 in this case) and the
persistence works perfectly, all the time, every time. Have you tried it
with specific ports? Does the application hand state across sessions on
different ports (say via a backend DB), or does the persistence really
only need to be on a single session (on a single port)?

Might be worth a try; if it works then perhaps you've wrinkled out some
sort of bug. Which in the long term can only be a good thing :)

Graeme


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