|
Keepalived controls LVS (starts, stops and configuration) and gives you
failover and real server monitoring, so I assume it's the equivalent of
heartbeat and ldirectord. So Keepalived vs. Ultramonkey is an
apples-to-apples comparison, I think.
FWIW, we chose keepalived years ago because Ultramonkey's development and
support seemed to be inactive, while keepalived's was active (and continues
to be). Ultramonkey seems to be a bit more alive these days, though.
Keepalived also seemed simpler than Ultramonkey at the time. We've been
using Keepalived for 3 years and have been happy with it.
On 11/10/05, Graham David Purcocks M.A.(Oxon.) <grahamp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
>
> Ultramonkey is a pre-packaged complete implementation of LVS, heartbeat
> and ldirectord. Which gives you (in order) load balancing, director
> failover and real server monitoring.
>
> Piranha is RedHats offerering of the same.
>
> Keepalived is, I think, equivalent to ldirectord but I'm not sure as I
> don't use it.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> On Thu, 2005-11-10 at 18:21, Dan Trainor wrote:
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > Hello, all -
> >
> > Once again I call upon the help of you fine people in helping me better
> > understand exactly what I'm looking at here. Before we get started, I'd
> > first like to thank you all who have helped me in the past. You're an
> > incredible help.
> >
> > I've been reading an excellent article by Mr. Zhang on
> > linux-mag.com<http://linux-mag.com>
> ,
> > http://www.linux-mag.com/2003-11/clusters_01.html. If you have not yet
> > read it, I highly suggest that you do. It is very informative.
> >
> > While reading this article, UltraMonkey, Piranha, and Keepalived were
> > briefly mentioned. Although there was a little intro given about all
> > three, their purpose seemed a bit fuzzy to me.
> >
> > It seems to me that all three of these services provide the same type of
> > service - they all determine which node is up/working/doing stuff, and
> > deals with this circumstance as it sees appropriate. What I don't quite
> > understand is the subtle differences between the three, or if I'm just
> > completely wrong here. All three describe themselves as dealing with
> > high availability and load balancing, but I can't really find a
> > comparrison between the three.
> >
> > If anyone might be able to point me in the right direction, or just give
> > me some links as to where I can read about the differences between the
> > three, I would greatly appreciate it.
> >
> > Thanks
> > - -dant
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
> > Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
> >
> > iD8DBQFDc4++hTPx3xy3bu0RAilDAKCSGx8mOwQXP2Ps+TRtrkHFL3bPSwCgoYdI
> > tU6lf0CxNYIlSxTy+bZO2yU=
> > =xkJn
> > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> --
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
|
