The problem with round robin DNS is that you will get distributed load but not fault tolerance; browsers that hit the defective server will get whatever error it's throwing. Nginx will hide an unresponsive server fro The browser.
On Jan 3, 2013, at 8:11 AM, RichBos <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Donovan > > Interesting, I'm wondering why you would use an EIP as the nature of Scalr > DNS negates the need for such? It seems like an unnecessary step? > > That said, load (and/or instance size) isn't really a concern for us at the > design stage, we're just wondering if the Nginx LB is actually needed for a > multiple instance LAMP farm as even though the Sclar wiki advises otherwise > it's unclear how traffic would be distributed if not, unless, as Srini > states, there may be some low-latency round robin DNS baked into the LAMP > role? > > Richard. > > On Thursday, 3 January 2013 16:02:45 UTC, Donovan wrote: > Use a nginx lb with an elastic ip; point dns to the elastic ip. I've found > micros work fine for lbs even with https. Then I monitor. If the micro gets > overloaded I skip smalls and go straight to c2.mediums. > > On Jan 3, 2013, at 6:54 AM, RichBos <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi, I'm just wondering if an Nginx load balancer is required for a x2 role >> LAMP Farm? (As it would be using x2 App instances). I would expect so but >> the Wiki documentation says no. However as I understand it wouldn't the DNS >> be better pointed at the Nginx LB rather than the LAMP (app) 'role'? I'm >> only thinking so as if not how would (web/app) traffic be distributed evenly >> between the x2 LAMP instances? Or have I misunderstood things? >> >> http://wiki.scalr.com/display/docs/Mixed+images+-+LAMP >> >> Any advice appreciated. >> >> Richard. >> -- >> >> > > -- > > --
