On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 05:45:34PM +0800, Joon wrote: > Hi all, > > I really dunno if this really is clustering, but say I have 2 servers > which I will be using for redundancy (server A goes down, server B takes > over). This means I should have exactly the same data on both servers, > updated in realtime or near realtime. >
Yes, this is a high-availability cluster, in active-passive mode. Yes, you need to have exactly the same data on both servers, either using some form of synchronization (a very difficult task, especially if the data changes often) or use of network attached storage or a storage attached network (very expensive solution, and probably only appropriate for high-end database apps). What application are you interested in? > Right now I'm reading on Linux Virtual Server. It seems a viable > solution, except that I only have 2 machines-- I don't have a director. > Any alternatives? If all you want to do is go active/passive, use Linux-HA heartbeat and run Apache simultaneously on both servers--all of the time, and ensure their configurations are perfectly identical. The only thing in your resource group is the cluster IP address you want your clients to be using. If one server goes down, the IP address gets taken over, back and forth. If you only have a web application, and are more interested in load balancing than redundant failover, your only possible option is to set up a round robin DNS. It's by no means as good as LVS, of course, but those are the breaks. -- Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] (#PLUG @ irc.free.net.ph) Official Website: http://plug.linux.org.ph Searchable Archives: http://marc.free.net.ph . To leave, go to http://lists.q-linux.com/mailman/listinfo/plug . Are you a Linux newbie? To join the newbie list, go to http://lists.q-linux.com/mailman/listinfo/ph-linux-newbie
