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@LinuxVirtualServer.org Send requests to lvs-users-requ...@linuxvirtualserver.org or go to http://lists.graemef.net/mailman/listinfo/lvs-users
