+-le 24.11.2008 12:20:13 -0500, Matthias Julius a dit : | Mathieu Arnold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | |> +-le 24.11.2008 17:20:01 +0100, Mathieu Arnold a dit : |> | Hum, the beter idea is hum, to use the haproxy I configured, which |> | spreads the load between the three ROMA servers, which is the one I put |> | in the examples up there, no ? |> |> Adding to that, I'd say that with the HAProxy in front of the ROMA servers, |> it should be able to work reliably. |> The ROMA servers should then be put at the begining of the servers list, so |> that [EMAIL PROTECTED] clients ask them most of the time, and fall back on XAPI or API |> only if all the ROMA servers in the proxy are down. | | True, this could be another approach. I guess the HAProxy queries | another ROMA server if the first one returns an error.
That is also my guess. | But if one of | the ROMA servers returns bogus data how do you find out which one it | is? Well, I have the logs, I can point fingers :-) -- Mathieu Arnold _______________________________________________ Tilesathome mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tilesathome
