Saludos, excelente día.
Primero que nada, les comento que soy un supernovato en linux, pero me gusta
experimentar y creo que es un buen inicio.
Al grano: Tengo aproximadamente 6 wifi abiertas en los alrededores de mi hogar,
cada que alguna no me va bien simplemente me salto a la siguiente y asi
I'm surprised to see so many choosing HAProxy over LVS, which seems fairly
integrated into Red Hat's offerings, with full documentation and rpms in
CentOS and RHN. I've set up LVS before for an internal java application and
it seemed straightforward after understanding arptables, etc. Is HAProxy
On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 3:26 PM, Iain Morris iain.t.mor...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 3:44 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia nka...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 1:36 AM, David Brian Chait dch...@invenda.com
wrote:
On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 4:40 AM, Tim Dunphy bluethu...@gmail.com
On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 1:36 AM, David Brian Chait dch...@invenda.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 4:40 AM, Tim Dunphy bluethu...@gmail.com wrote:
however for my purpose open and free HAProxy remains best choice!!
+1 for HAProxy; excellent piece of software.
It really depends on your needs,
m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
A warning: round robin can be problematical.
Amen. Consider what happens with round-robin DNS when one host
stops working. Round-robin DNS will hand out the address of the
failed host just as often as it did when it was all working.
Some clients (applications) will
an interesting choice for low cost hardware load balancing appliances
is coyote point
http://www.coyotepoint.com/products/?gclid=CI6ri9jQu6cCFQbc4Aodmi1V4Q
however for my purpose open and free HAProxy remains best choice!!
On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 9:22 PM, Charles Polisher cpol...@surewest.net
On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 4:40 AM, Tim Dunphy bluethu...@gmail.com wrote:
however for my purpose open and free HAProxy remains best choice!!
+1 for HAProxy; excellent piece of software.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 4:40 AM, Tim Dunphy bluethu...@gmail.com wrote:
however for my purpose open and free HAProxy remains best choice!!
+1 for HAProxy; excellent piece of software.
It really depends on your needs, if you are building a production ops
environment then the last thing that
aurfal...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mar 3, 2011, at 3:43 PM, Todd wrote:
Can anyone help me hash out how best to load balance a website that
is getting considerable traffic? In the past I only have experience
with BigIP where you have a load balancing device that keeps track
and send traffic to
On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 6:43 PM, Todd slackmoehrle.li...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi All,
Can anyone help me hash out how best to load balance a website that is
getting considerable traffic? In the past I only have experience with BigIP
where you have a load balancing device that keeps track and send
OK, so what's good? For my requirements, HAProxy is excellent. It
handled sticky sessions well, performs monitoring of each host, allows
dynamic adding/removing of servers, as well as maintenance modes.
It's very easy to install and configure. I'm using is as the backend
to apache that is
also I forgot to mention for heartbeat I use keepalived
http://www.keepalived.org/
I found hearbeat a little difficult to implement but keepalived by
comparison is a breeze to setup. Forget about multiple A records.
That's a naive approach and entirely unnecessary. As other's have
pointed out
Brian,
Thanks for all of the great words here. I appreciate the detail in your
reply.
OK, so what's good? For my requirements, HAProxy is excellent. It
handled sticky sessions well, performs monitoring of each host, allows
dynamic adding/removing of servers, as well as maintenance modes.
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 9:34 AM, Todd slackmoehrle.li...@gmail.com wrote:
Brian,
Thanks for all of the great words here. I appreciate the detail in your
reply.
OK, so what's good? For my requirements, HAProxy is excellent. It
handled sticky sessions well, performs monitoring of each host,
James Nguyen wrote:
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 9:34 AM, Todd slackmoehrle.li...@gmail.com wrote:
Brian,
Thanks for all of the great words here. I appreciate the detail in your
reply.
OK, so what's good? For my requirements, HAProxy is excellent. It
snip
if they think the solution requires a
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 9:18 PM, James Nguyen ja...@callfire.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 9:34 AM, Todd slackmoehrle.li...@gmail.com wrote:
Brian,
Thanks for all of the great words here. I appreciate the detail in your
reply.
OK, so what's good? For my requirements, HAProxy is
On 3/4/2011 1:18 PM, James Nguyen wrote:
You want two boxes that run both haproxy + keepalived. This way you
get the load balancing (HAProxy) plus the high availability
(Keepalived) using a shared virtual IP for your two boxes. You can do
maintenance on either one while traffic still
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 11:25 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
James Nguyen wrote:
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 9:34 AM, Todd slackmoehrle.li...@gmail.com wrote:
Brian,
Thanks for all of the great words here. I appreciate the detail in your
reply.
OK, so what's good? For my requirements, HAProxy is
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 12:34 PM, Todd slackmoehrle.li...@gmail.com wrote:
Brian,
Thanks for all of the great words here. I appreciate the detail in your
reply.
OK, so what's good? For my requirements, HAProxy is excellent. It
handled sticky sessions well, performs monitoring of each host,
Hi All,
Can anyone help me hash out how best to load balance a website that is
getting considerable traffic? In the past I only have experience with BigIP
where you have a load balancing device that keeps track and send traffic to
the best server possible at the time. This was a proprietary
On Mar 3, 2011, at 3:43 PM, Todd wrote:
Hi All,
Can anyone help me hash out how best to load balance a website that
is getting considerable traffic? In the past I only have experience
with BigIP where you have a load balancing device that keeps track
and send traffic to the best
On 3/3/11 3:51 PM, aurfal...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mar 3, 2011, at 3:43 PM, Todd wrote:
Hi All,
Can anyone help me hash out how best to load balance a website that
is getting considerable traffic? In the past I only have experience
with BigIP where you have a load balancing device that
Round robin DNS would balance load, but will cause problems if one of
them goes down.
Hi Sean,
Can you explain as I may be planning this for a site.
So if I have 2 identical servers, each with there own IP, how will one
of them going down cause issues?
I'm assuming multiple A records for
On Mar 3, 2011, at 4:05 PM, Sean Hart wrote:
IPVS or LVS can work as a really simple/free solution:
http://www.linuxvirtualserver.org/software/ipvs.html
This was a very cool link.
I see that if in mid stream a server goes down while one is on it,
problems could arise as it won't be
On 03/03/11 4:12 PM, aurfal...@gmail.com wrote:
Can you explain as I may be planning this for a site.
So if I have 2 identical servers, each with there own IP, how will one
of them going down cause issues?
I'm assuming multiple A records for the same host will be handled fine
by the client
On Mar 3, 2011, at 4:12 PM, aurfal...@gmail.com wrote:
Round robin DNS would balance load, but will cause problems if one of
them goes down.
Hi Sean,
Can you explain as I may be planning this for a site.
So if I have 2 identical servers, each with there own IP, how will one
of them
On Mar 3, 2011, at 4:24 PM, John R Pierce wrote:
On 03/03/11 4:12 PM, aurfal...@gmail.com wrote:
Can you explain as I may be planning this for a site.
So if I have 2 identical servers, each with there own IP, how will
one
of them going down cause issues?
I'm assuming multiple A records
On Mar 3, 2011, at 4:25 PM, Ryan Ordway wrote:
On Mar 3, 2011, at 4:12 PM, aurfal...@gmail.com wrote:
Round robin DNS would balance load, but will cause problems if one
of
them goes down.
Hi Sean,
Can you explain as I may be planning this for a site.
So if I have 2 identical servers,
Can anyone help me hash out how best to load balance a website that is
getting considerable traffic? In the past I only have experience with
BigIP where you have a load balancing device that keeps track and send
traffic to the best server possible at the time. This was a proprietary
system
- Original Message -
| Hi All,
|
| Can anyone help me hash out how best to load balance a website that is
| getting considerable traffic? In the past I only have experience with
| BigIP
| where you have a load balancing device that keeps track and send
| traffic to
| the best server
http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=relaydapropos=0sektion=0manpath=OpenBSD+Currentarch=i386format=html
I wouldn't be surprised if that what was in part driving those low
cost appliance load balancers.
Cool find, a definite book mark.
- aurf
Hi Sean,
Can you explain as I may be planning this for a site.
So if I have 2 identical servers, each with there own IP, how will
one
of them going down cause issues?
I'm assuming multiple A records for the same host will be handled
fine
by the client lookup?
example.com resolves
On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 7:25 PM, Ryan Ordway rord...@oregonstate.edu wrote:
On Mar 3, 2011, at 4:12 PM, aurfal...@gmail.com wrote:
Round robin DNS would balance load, but will cause problems if one of
them goes down.
Hi Sean,
Can you explain as I may be planning this for a site.
So if I
On 3/3/11 7:56 PM, Sean Hart wrote:
Hi Sean,
Can you explain as I may be planning this for a site.
So if I have 2 identical servers, each with there own IP, how will
one
of them going down cause issues?
I'm assuming multiple A records for the same host will be handled
fine
by the
I've used round-robin DNS with good success, but I added some additional
tweaks using Heartbeat to manage the actual addresses. A typical case
is where you have two systems that will be used to offer a service.
Each machine has it's own IP address, but in addition there are a pair
of IPs for
Hi everyone:
According to Automated failover and recovery of virtualized guests in
Advanced Platform, one can easily migrate virtualized guests around
different hosts. However, is it currently possible for CentOS 5 with
VirtualizationClustering Suite to migrate guests dynamically
according to
36 matches
Mail list logo
