On 2011-01-28, at 6:26 AM, "Stewart Robinson" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Other people have configured two Varnish servers to be backends for
> each other. When you see the other Varnish cache as your remote IP you
> then point the request to the real backend. This duplicates your cache
> items in each cache.
>
> Be aware of http://www.varnish-cache.org/trac/wiki/VCLExampleHashIgnoreBusy
>
> Stew
>
> On 28 January 2011 10:46, Siju George <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I understand that varnish does not support cache peering like Squid.
>> My planned set up is something like
>>
>>
>> ---- Webserver1 --- ------- Cache ---
>> ------ API
>> LB ----| |---- LB----| |---- LB
>> ----|
>> ---- Webserver2 --- ------- Cache ---
>> ------ API
>>
>> So if I am using Varnish as Cache what is the best way to configure them so
>> that there is redundancy and the setup can continue even if one Cache fails?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> --Siju
Put two behind LB. Caches are cooler but you get high availability.
Easy to do maintenance this way.
Stefan Caunter
Operations
TorstarDigital
416.561.4871
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> varnish-misc mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> varnish-misc mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc
_______________________________________________
varnish-misc mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc
