On 2/2/06, Chris Robertson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Andrew Pantyukhin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2006 12:42 AM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: [squid-users] Seamless squid fail-over with requirements > > > > > > We've got several FreeBSD gateways, each redirecting > > http traffic to a central squid cache. The cache is under > > quite a load, so it's taken down for maintenance often > > and hangs not so rarely, too. When bad things happen, > > a perl script on each gateway detects the failure (within > > 5 seconds) and ceases redirections, letting http traffic > > through NAT until the cache goes up again. > > > > This is fine mostly. The thing is a proxy is much nicer > > than plain NAT in many aspects. Also, when squid > > goes down there's an effective 10-15 seconds' gap in > > sevice, resulting in numerous time-outs, interruptions of > > big downloads and other difficulties. > > > > What I want is to run proxy-only squid on each gateway, > > which should redirect all requests to the central cache. I > > think this way the fail-over will be more seamless. > > > > We've got 2 custom requirements, though: > > 1. The central cache must see the IP's of its clients > > Look into http://devel.squid-cache.org/projects.html#follow_xff > > > 2. Redirector on the central cache must work > > I'm not sure if the XFF patch affects redirectors. > > > > > Is there a sane way to do this? > > > > Be aware, the central proxy going down is still going to kill in-transit > requests (i.e. big downloads will still die). Perhaps a better option would > be to add another central server (or two), and load balance between them. > That might reduce the likelihood of the central server going down. To the > best of my knowledge, seamless hand-off of TCP streams is not possible with > Squid. > > Chris >
Thanks, this is very helpful.
