On Tue, 21 Aug 2012, Marcus Bointon wrote: > On 21 Aug 2012, at 20:11, Jon Heese <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> In testing I've found that as long as Apache binds to 0.0.0.0, any IP >> takeovers will work smoothly without Apache restarts. > > I've done this for years with haproxy by allowing non-local binding:
I've been doing the same thing. Failovers work much faster when all you need to do is to move the IP and not start/stop software > I've never figured out why people use heartbeat to 'manage' the web front end > when it can just stay running. If haproxy is pointing at multiple web > servers, it can deal with monitoring, failover and balancing for them. One legitimate reason for doing this is that you can then have heartbeat 'monitor' the webserver and if the webserver dies, initiate a failover. However I think this is better done by having a dummy service that takes no time to start/stop and implements it's status with a file and then have some other, more extensive monitoring system checking your web front end (checking that it actually works, not just that apache is running) and altering the status file that heartbeat checks. Or you can have your monitoring software send a message to heartbeat to trigger a failover. > I use heartbeat etc but I find it incredibly hard to work with (Jon Heese's > config file is a great example of something that should be simple but really > isn't) - haproxy is incredibly easy in comparison. I still have most systems using the version 1 style haresources config. It's great for doing the simple failover scenario easily. David Lang _______________________________________________ Linux-HA mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
