|
Currently I am using the ldirectord. but so far in terms of detecting the
failed Server, its performance is not that good. Thanks for the suggestion,
now i will try the keepalived.
From: lvs-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Reply-To: lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To: lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: lvs-users Digest, Vol 48, Issue 30
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 17:52:06 +0100 (CET)
Send lvs-users mailing list submissions to
lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://www.in-addr.de/mailman/listinfo/lvs-users
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
lvs-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
You can reach the person managing the list at
lvs-users-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of lvs-users digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Linux LVS Server (Mansoor Ali)
2. Re: Linux LVS Server (Vin?cius Kopelke)
3. Re: Linux LVS Server (Graeme Fowler)
4. RE: Linux LVS Server (Errol Neal)
5. Re: Realservers as client (Joseph Mack NA3T)
6. Major issue with LVS-DR when a server gets overloaded
(Matthias Saou)
7. Re: Major issue with LVS-DR when a server gets overloaded
(Joseph Mack NA3T)
8. real servers adding with virtual server / directors (vlrk)
9. ipt_connlimit through LVS? (Don Sizemore)
10. Problem with IP-takeover (Ahmad Ndoung)
From: "Mansoor Ali" <mhafeez72@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: "LinuxVirtualServer.org users mailing
list."<lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Linux LVS Server
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 12:25:39 +0000
Hello guys
I want to ask one thing about the Linux LVS Solution. I have setup the
LVS-NAT solution, it worked fine but i m having one small issue onto it. If
one of my real server is down,switched-off the Director does not detect it
immediatley as well the connections are not forwarded immediately to the
second Real Server. At times even it is very difficult to make connection
with the Second Real Server.
Is this normal with LVS or there can be some specific configuration
required in this regard?
Mani Ali
_________________________________________________________________
MSN Hotmail is evolving ? check out the new Windows Live Mail
http://ideas.live.com
From: Vinícius Kopelke <vini@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: "LinuxVirtualServer.org users mailing
list."<lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "LinuxVirtualServer.org users mailing
list."<lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Linux LVS Server
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 10:36:50 -0200
Is this normal with LVS or there can be some specific configuration
required
in this regard?
Yes it´s normal. For real servers health checking I use keepalived
www.keepalived.org.
When one of the server of the LVS server pool is down, keepalived informs
the linux kernel via a setsockopt call to remove this server entrie from
the LVS topology.
When the server comes up, keepalived add it again.
Its very usefull and easy for implement.
good luck!
----- Original Message ----- From: "Mansoor Ali" <mhafeez72@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 10:25 AM
Subject: Linux LVS Server
Hello guys
I want to ask one thing about the Linux LVS Solution. I have setup the
LVS-NAT solution, it worked fine but i m having one small issue onto it.
If one of my real server is down,switched-off the Director does not detect
it immediatley as well the connections are not forwarded immediately to
the second Real Server. At times even it is very difficult to make
connection with the Second Real Server.
Is this normal with LVS or there can be some specific configuration
required in this regard?
Mani Ali
_________________________________________________________________
MSN Hotmail is evolving - check out the new Windows Live Mail
http://ideas.live.com
From: Graeme Fowler <graeme@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: "LinuxVirtualServer.org users mailing
list."<lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "LinuxVirtualServer.org users mailing
list."<lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Linux LVS Server
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 12:37:32 +0000
On 30/01/2007 12:25, Mansoor Ali wrote:
I want to ask one thing about the Linux LVS Solution. I have setup the
LVS-NAT solution, it worked fine but i m having one small issue onto it.
If one of my real server is down,switched-off the Director does not detect
it immediatley as well the connections are not forwarded immediately to
the second Real Server. At times even it is very difficult to make
connection with the Second Real Server.
Depending on your setup this is to be expected.
Is this normal with LVS or there can be some specific configuration
required in this regard?
LVS itself provides no healthcheck facility - it's just a flashy router.
You need to add something to it for the high-availability aspects, some of
which are described here:
http://www.linuxvirtualserver.org/HighAvailability.html
The two (apparently, although this is not a scientific analysis!) most
popular are:
ldirectord http://www.vergenet.net/linux/ldirectord/
keepalived http://www.keepalived.org/
Graeme
From: "Errol Neal" <eneal@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: "LinuxVirtualServer.org users mailing
list."<lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "LinuxVirtualServer.org users mailing
list."<lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: Linux LVS Server
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 07:53:58 -0500
>> Hello guys
>> If one of my real server is down,switched-off the Director does not
detect it immediatley >> as well the connections are not forwarded ....
You should check out http://www.keepalived.org. It's a VRRP
implementation that supports high availability, health checking and
more. It should suffice.
** please note, that the keepalived.conf file is where you'll also
implement your LVS config
Errol
From: Joseph Mack NA3T <jmack@xxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: "LinuxVirtualServer.org users mailing
list."<lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: leon@xxxxxxxxx,<lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Realservers as client
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 04:59:04 -0800 (PST)
On Tue, 30 Jan 2007, Leon Botes wrote:
Well the services on the real servers that need to connect to the database
are themselves balanced. The situation where maybe the database on the
real server dies but the application continues to run would create a
scenario where the application would not be able to write to the database
yet the application would still respond to client requests.
yes you have to handle failover but don't confuse loadbalancing with
failover
Joe
From: Matthias
Saou<thias@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: "LinuxVirtualServer.org users mailing
list."<lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "LinuxVirtualServer.org users mailing
list."<lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Major issue with LVS-DR when a server gets overloaded
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 14:22:58 +0100
Hi,
I've been using a Foundry Networks ServerIron XL until now, with DSR
("Direct Server Response" aka "Direct Response", "DR") to load-balance
one virtual server to six real web servers.
All 6 real servers are identical and have the same weight. When one of
the real web servers gets overloaded, the URL checked on it starts
sending a 500 status code instead of the normal 200. In this case, I
would expect the real server to be taken out of the load-balancing and
all traffic to be sent to the other 5 remaining real servers. But no.
In the above scenario, what I saw in the ServerIron logs was that the
real server was properly detected as "down", but all web traffic got
sent to this server instead of having it taken offline(!!), nothing
sent to the others, thus timeouts and some 500 errors for all clients,
and a real server in bad shape, needing to be rebooted in many cases.
I thought this was a bug with the ServerIron. So I looked at LVS.
I implemented a parallel identical setup using LVS and keepalived. The
setup is similar, with LVS-DR and all 6 real web servers. Only the
virtual server IP address changes, obviously, to keep both setups
in parallel.
My limited testing worked fine, but when I started sending real
traffic, the exact same issue as with the ServerIron happened!
Symptoms :
- The virtual IP address no longer responds on port 80, it times out
- The real server having problems gets REALLY overloaded
- All other 5 real servers no longer receive any traffic
- ipvsadm show no new active or inactive connections (counters stay the
same), only the persistent connections counters decrease slowly (as
expected since there are no new connections...)
Even after restarting the problematic real server, keepalived re-adds
it properly, but nothing works anymore. I need to restart keepalived
(which flushes the ipvsadm configuration by default) for things to
start working again.
I am really confused. I've tried stopping the web daemon on one of the
real servers under production load, and it gets taken out as expected,
and all keeps working fine. It seems that only when the web server still
responds with 500 status and gets detected as down, then up, then down
again etc. does the problem appear. Note that the setup can work fine
for hours and hours, the issue only appears when a real server has a
problem.
I would like to have tried some kind of "keep the real server disabled
for n seconds when it's detected as down" in order to keep the check
from flip-flopping like this, but there is no such setting in
keepalived AFAICS.
Has anyone already seen a similar problem? I've read many posts in the
archive regarding LVS-DR issues, but haven't seen anyone complaining
from the same, and it seems like the LVS-DR setup works fine for many!
Details :
- RHEL4 i386 fully updated (2.6.9-42.0.3.ELsmp) on all servers
- lighttpd and PHP web servers
- ipvsadm 1.24-6 (from RHN)
- keepalived 1.1.13
- virtual server IP address configured as lo:0 on all real servers
- sysctl changes made on real servers :
net.ipv4.conf.eth0.arp_ignore = 2 (public lan)
net.ipv4.conf.eth1.arp_ignore = 2 (private lan)
- each real server is outputting approx. 3Mbps
I've tried with sh, lc and rr schedulers, but same thing with all.
...help!? :-)
Matthias
From: Joseph Mack NA3T <jmack@xxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: "LinuxVirtualServer.org users mailing
list."<lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "LinuxVirtualServer.org users mailing
list."<lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Major issue with LVS-DR when a server gets overloaded
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 06:13:57 -0800 (PST)
On Tue, 30 Jan 2007, Matthias Saou wrote:
traffic, the exact same issue as with the ServerIron happened!
Symptoms :
- The virtual IP address no longer responds on port 80, it times out
- The real server having problems gets REALLY overloaded
perhaps you should ask about this on the keepalived mailing list. There
should be a hysteresis that stops the realserver flapping.
- All other 5 real servers no longer receive any traffic
- ipvsadm show no new active or inactive connections (counters stay the
same), only the persistent connections counters decrease slowly (as
expected since there are no new connections...)
never seen this before. The other realservers should be receiving packets
just fine unless something else is jammed (eg the upstream router is
overloaded with icmp unreachable)
I would like to have tried some kind of "keep the real server disabled
for n seconds when it's detected as down" in order to keep the check
from flip-flopping like this, but there is no such setting in
keepalived AFAICS.
I'm surprised it's not in there. Ask ALexandre about it.
Joe
From: vlrk <tech_voip@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: "LinuxVirtualServer.org users mailing
list."<lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: real servers adding with virtual server / directors
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 14:44:08 +0000 (GMT)
Hello list,
Iam running ipvs and i could not able to add real
servers to director/ virtual server .
My scenarios is as below.
A-> 192.168.68.49 ( director)
B-> 192.168.68.73 (real server)
C-> 192.168.68.49 (real server)
I have kernel version 2.6.10 running redhat EL in
three machines .
My aim is to acheive the following architectures
in B and C iam running the telnet service so any body
connectes to telent 192.168.68.49 it has to check with
real servers and connect to them based on availability
.
I want use tunneling .
the following commands i used .
ipvsadm -A -t 192.168.68.49:23
ipvsadm -a -t 192.168.68.49:23 -r 192.168.68.73:23 -i
ipvsadm -a -t 192.168.68.49:23 -r 192.168.68.74:23 -i
and in sysctl.conf of all ips ipv4 forward is enabled.
No firewall or iptables running.
if i try to connect from other machine like .254 it s
trying to connect and in A machine if see ipvsdm it
shows that 74 machine connection state as inactive, it
never tries to 73.
as a matter of fact i never seen B and C as connected
state in director when i see with ipvsadm.
so how to solve this .
Am i missing any thing here .
regards
vlrk
__________________________________________________________
Yahoo! India Answers: Share what you know. Learn something new
http://in.answers.yahoo.com/
From: Don Sizemore <dls@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: "LinuxVirtualServer.org users mailing
list."<lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: ipt_connlimit through LVS?
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 10:39:07 -0500 (EST)
hi all,
probably a dumb question on my part, but my googling and ipvsadm
man-paging hasn't turned up what i'm looking for. is there any way to
limit connections per IP through IPVS, to mimic the netfilter connection
limit module ipt_connlimit?
i see ipvsadm's threshold option, but it does totals per server.
thank you, 919.962.5646 w
donald sizemore, ii 919.260.4915 c
ibiblio.org n stoof 919.962.8071 f
From: "Ahmad Ndoung" <hasman16@xxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: "LinuxVirtualServer.org users mailing
list."<lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Problem with IP-takeover
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 10:51:52 -0600
Hi to all
I have a problem with my system and need help.
I am using RHEL 4 in 4 machines, 2 for load balancing and 2 real servers.
The master load balancer works fine but the problem is when it goes down
and
after the backup system kicks in, it does not inherit the VIP, is there any
way this can be done automatically?
What should I look for in my systems to make sure that I have the proper
configuration.
Thanks
_______________________________________________
lvs-users mailing list
lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.in-addr.de/mailman/listinfo/lvs-users
_________________________________________________________________
Get Hotmail, News, Sport and Entertainment from MSN on your mobile.
http://www.msn.txt4content.com/
|
