|
Hello,
i want to put a loadbalancer in front of several squids, which cache output
of content generators.
The first option is to use the apache/mod_proxy/mod_balancer combination.
Thats easy to configure, you even have a little backend to disable
BalancerMembers manually and also i dont need any special network
configuration. We are quite happy with it. Its simple
But there is this overhead of interpreting the content and to manage the
connections.
So the second option would involve IPVS, which just rewrites the packes and
forwards them to a chosen BalancerMember.
There are two ways:
A) IPVS behaves like mod_proxy, the chosen Member will see a request coming
from the LoadBalancer's LAN-IP.
Bad: I lose the client IP on the Member/real server (in mod_proxy i have at
least "X-Forwarded-For")
B) IPVS forwards the packet to the chosen Member. The source address is
unchanged.
Bad: I need to change the default route, so that answers always go back
through the LoadBalancer. This complicates the otherwise so simple network
setup. People need to know about IPVS. Its not so obvious and self
explanatory.
So the question: Is IPVS worth the trouble?
Or is this an exaggeration, when i say apache/mod_proxy uses way more
resources?
What would you say?
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/ipvs-or-apache-mod_proxy-mod_balancer-tp24184926p24184926.html
Sent from the LVS mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
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
|
