|
Thank you very much for the reply, and please forgive my top posting. I am
using the Office365 web access to email at the moment, and it makes me look
like a churl in newsgroups.
The thing that confuses me at the moment is the required product mix if I use
keepalived. Right now I'm using the Corosync+Pacemaker+LVS+lidirectord stack.
If I switch to keepalived, how much does that replace, and why? From reading
the keepalived docs (which appear to be a decade old) it would seem that
keepalived wants to be a do-it-all solution, so I guess I'd have to throw away
what I know about Corosync and Pacemaker? And is HAproxy really necessary?
--Eric
________________________________________
From: lvs-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<lvs-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Malcolm Turnbull
<malcolm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 12:39 AM
To: LinuxVirtualServer.org users mailing list.
Subject: Re: [lvs-users] Best Alternative to ldirectord
Eric,
Keepalived is your only other decent choice when it comes to LVS.
You could stick with ldirectord and break it out onto several hosts/clusters?
Its normally just the health checking that starts becoming an issue.
You are also welcome to use our version of ldirectord in the
loadbalancer.org product (definitely supported).
Just download our demo and take a copy of ldirectord its GPL....
We just haven't got around to syncing our changes with Horms ...who is
quite often nice enough to fix our broken code :-).
Ps. You might find our Windows feedback agent useful for the terminal
servers (also open source)- its compatible with Ldirectord & HAProxy
http://blog.loadbalancer.org/open-source-windows-service-for-reporting-server-load-back-to-haproxy-load-balancer-feedback-agent/
On 7 August 2015 at 03:44, Eric Robinson <eric.robinson@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Okay guys, don't laugh too hard. I guess I might be the last person in the
> world still using ldirectord. Until recently, my attitude has been "If it
> ain't broke, don't fix it." But I think we finally outgrew it. We currently
> have 1700+ virtual services (600 tomcats pointed to 1200 realservers, 500
> MySQL redirections, 10 Windows terminal server services pointed to 20
> realservers, and a smattering of other stuff). We've been pretty satisfied
> with ldirectord. It performs well, uses very little resources, but it has a
> few problems and it's old and unmaintained, so we're finally looking for a
> new solution. What's the best FOSS alternative? I've been looking at
> keepalived, but it seems to want haproxy as well, and the setup looks more
> much more complicated than ldirectord's. What's the current conventional
> wisdom for fast, easy, cheap (free), load balancing on Linux?
>
>
> --Eric
> _______________________________________________
> 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
--
Regards,
Malcolm Turnbull.
Loadbalancer.org Ltd.
Phone: +44 (0)330 1604540
http://www.loadbalancer.org/
_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
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
|
