|
On Sun, 2009-04-12 at 23:49 -0700, Don McGregor wrote:
> Hmmm. Is there a preferred 2.6 kernel version set of packages for
> HA/Load balancing?
The reason I said "uh-oh" was because Piranha isn't used by too many
people on this mailing list, and those who answer most of the questions
here haven't ever used it. There's nothing wrong with Piranha per se,
it's simply that support for it is available elsewhere.
> I'm coming into this somewhat naively expecting stuff to actually
> work.
And work it does.
> So who's the FOS market leader in Linux HA/Load balancing, and
> the set of packages with a reasonable level of community support?
To take a commercial tack for a moment, what are your technical
requirements? That's a slightly rhetorical question, though.
There are basically two main packages which layer on top of LVS (ipvs)
to provide HA+Load Balancing:
1. ldirectord (load balancing, server health checking) & heartbeat (HA),
both children of the Linux-HA project at the moment. You'll find various
links to them but you'll also find heartbeat and heartbeat-ldirectord in
the "extras" yum repo for CentOS 5.3.
2. keepalived (provides all three in one go), available from
http://www.keepalived.org/
Going back to Piranha, however, there's nothing stopping it from being
used *but* you have to bear in mind that it effectively supports itself
using a mailing list at RedHat.com.
And going back to your original question - did you try the setup without
fwmarks yet?
Graeme
_______________________________________________
Please read the documentation before posting - it's available at:
http://www.linuxvirtualserver.org/
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
|
