Re: Standby/backup with >2 nodes
Not quite what you're looking for, but could you use weights on the backend systems? It would work, while all three servers are up and running. Say give the 3rd server that has other services on it a weight of 1 and the other two a weight of 50. If I understand weights, then the two servers would get 100 out of 101 requests (50 apiece), that last 1 request going to the 3rd server. I think that would probably suffice. The difficulty will be when one of the two main servers die. Then the remaining one will continue to get 50x the load the 3rd system will have, and the load won't be balanced equally between them. So the same 101 requests I guess would be 100 to the remaining server and I guess technically 2 to that 3rd server w/other services on it. So rather than both remaining servers getting 50 each, so your remaining main server would have to be able to handle such a load. On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 1:37 PM, Jim Riggs wrote: > Good question. The third server has some other ancillary services running > that I want to have priority unless the box is needed in case of a failure of > the active ones. I also use the standby to stage changes, config updates, > etc., before releasing to the active boxes. PH
Re: Standby/backup with >2 nodes
Good question. The third server has some other ancillary services running that I want to have priority unless the box is needed in case of a failure of the active ones. I also use the standby to stage changes, config updates, etc., before releasing to the active boxes. On 3 Dec 2009, at 15:30, John Lauro wrote: >> Is there some simple configuration option(s) staring me in the face >> that I'm missing, or is this more complex than it seems on the surface? >> > > In terms of some simple configuration option... > Why not just have 3 active? If one is down, it's load will automatically be > routed to the other two. > > > If you really want to do no more than two active, you could do something > like load balance internally to two different virtual servers that then only > have a single active and a backup server for each of those two, and just > make their backup servers the same. Still, not sure why you would want to > do that instead of just 3 active servers... > > >
RE: Standby/backup with >2 nodes
> Is there some simple configuration option(s) staring me in the face > that I'm missing, or is this more complex than it seems on the surface? > In terms of some simple configuration option... Why not just have 3 active? If one is down, it's load will automatically be routed to the other two. If you really want to do no more than two active, you could do something like load balance internally to two different virtual servers that then only have a single active and a backup server for each of those two, and just make their backup servers the same. Still, not sure why you would want to do that instead of just 3 active servers...
