I have done something similar for the VIP, giving the VIP the IP of the local interface (not loopback) so that the subsystems (email, plugin server, flashboards, etc.) use the local server, but I've never seen a configuration where the hostname should resolve to the loopback interface.
The major difference between the loopback interface and a network interface is the MTU size, which could actually be the same if you are using jumbo frames, but this is doubtful. I don't think the larger MTU will make much of a difference with the performance of the application since the latency is virtually non-existent. What problem are you having where this suggestion was provided? Axton Grams On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 9:24 AM, patrick zandi <[email protected]> wrote: > ** let me say it this way.. > is 127.0.0.1 any faster than xx.yy.zz.02 ? no.. it is still in > the/etc/host file (and the resovle conf says resolve files before dns) > so how is this going to make my install any faster and prevent connection > errors.. ... this is that part I am confused on.. > how is 1 ip any faster than the next.. (except that it is dns resolved > from inside which is a call: that is slow).. > > I agree it will not hurt.. it will do nothing.. but it breaks > standardization of configurations.. on all boxes.. which we cannot do > anyways.. > I am cranky.. I need to drink more coffee.. > > > > On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 10:13 AM, Longwing, LJ CTR MDA/IC < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Patrick, >> I believe they may be referring to the hosts file on the SERVER, not on >> your workstation. While I personally thing this SHOULDN'T be necessary >> because of the IP Route table, it certainly wouldn't hurt anything. >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto: >> [email protected]] On Behalf Of patrick zandi >> Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2012 8:07 AM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: 7.6.04 SP3 -- install problems -- Support said a weird thing.. >> >> ** I know I am sleepy, do to lack of it last night.. however this appears >> to be preposterous statement.. >> >> --- >> >> 1] Server name and fully qualified domain name for the server should be >> resolved through hosts file using the ip address 127.0.0.1. >> >> For example: >> >> 127.0.0.1 myServerName myServerName.myDomain.com >> >> ===> HUH? >> so now I should make /etc/hosts file to DNS resolve to 127.0.0.1 --- >> What! I am confused. >> I must be loosing my mind ! Why would you point >> >> 127.0.0.1 HOSTNAME >> >> ----> so you have 4 Rails correct ? >> #1 -- Production VIP xx.yy.zz.02 Remedy <-hostname VIP >> Prod -a (teaming) xx.yy.zz.03 Remedy-a >> prod - b (teaming) xx.yy.zz.04 Remedy-b >> #2 -- Management xx.yy.99.02 Remedy-mgt <-hostname >> #3 -- Backup Rail (BUR) xx.yy.55.02 Remedy-bur <- hostname >> #4 -- OOB (lights out) xx.yy.77.02 Remedy-lo <--hostname >> ---> >> >> Are they saying to make the production rail 127.0.0.1 --- this sounds >> Nuts.. to me.. >> >> The my Remedy server how do I get to it ? 127.0.0.1 LOL -- Ridiculous.. >> >> -- >> Patrick Zandi >> _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ >> >> >> _______________________________________________________________________________ >> UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org >> attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are" >> > > > > -- > Patrick Zandi > _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ > _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
