LVS
lvs-users
Google
 
Web LinuxVirtualServer.org

Re: fail-over as opposed to round-robin

To: "LinuxVirtualServer.org users mailing list." <lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: fail-over as opposed to round-robin
From: Sadique <sadique@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 17:26:35 +0530
You don't need LVS for this setup. All that you need is two servers with
Hearbeat or KeepAlived- VRRPv2

ahall@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

>Hi there,
>
>Can the LVS provide a fail-over type of redundancy, as well as a round-robin 
>type?
>
>That is, if I have two servers in my virtual "pool" can I direct all traffic to
>just one server until it fails, and then all traffic will be directed to the
>other server?
>
>This is the configuration I would like, for I don't wish to round-robin 
>requests
>across both servers in the pool.
>
>Is this possible?
>
>Thanks very much.
>
>
>
>
>---- - Madasafish - Voted Best Heavy Consumer Broadband Provider in the 2006 
>Internet Industry Awards http://www.madasafish.com/
>
>
>  
>


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