Chris Stephens wrote:
I've considered that scenario but - if I understand you correctly - it really just shares load and adds an element of redundancy. If server B goes away it doesn't matter because server A is still there. If Jahia/Tomcat fails on server A it likewise doesn't matter. But if server A dies (i.e. completely: like a ahrdware failure) you still lose the website.
No?
No.
So I agree it's an improvement but it's not quite perfect.
Actually from the Jahia standpoint, it *is* perfect. The rest is a db and file server redundancy issue, that doesn't belong to this list.
I was hoping there was a way to wake Jahia up to the fact that its filesystem repository had changed without restarting it. Maybe this is not possible...
It is possible, but it ins't a Jahia problem. If you want full redundancy, you need 2 more components:
- redundant file server (or SAN if you can afford it)
- redundant database server (failover is good, live raplication is bad as it will cause a huge performance hit).
PS: this whole discussion is silly, as you haven't defined what you mean by "full redundancy". Is it eleiminating single point of failures? Is it eliminating dual point of failures? Is it getting 99.9% uptime? Is it getting 99.99% uptime? Etc.
--
Cheers,
Bal�zs
