|
Gerry Reno wrote:
> Joseph Mack NA3T wrote:
>
>> realserver is an LVS term referring to the machine/node(s)
>> that are being loadbalanced by the director.
>>
>> I've never liked the LVS nomenclature; e.g. "virtual",
>> "realserver", but since I couldn't come up with an
>> alternative and no-one else seemed to mind, I've just
>> accepted it. We haven't had too much problems with the word
>> "virtual" since we haven't run into other projects using the
>> term much. However if realservers are going to be
>> virtualised, there's going to be lots of name space
>> collisions.
>>
>>
>>
> Joe,
> I can see the term 'realserver' becoming a problem. A lot of people are
> going to think this is real hardware when it's not limited to just real
> hardware. I think a better term might be 'actual server' or 'runserver'
> or 'destination server' or 'target server'
or 'pool server'
> or anything that doesn't use
> real/virtual. The virtualization world is pretty much defining the
> meaning of real/virtual. The LVS world needs to adopt some other
> language to describe where the target service lives.
>
>
> Gerry
>
> _______________________________________________
> LinuxVirtualServer.org mailing list - lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Send requests to lvs-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> or go to http://lists.graemef.net/mailman/listinfo/lvs-users
>
>
|
