hello,
On 2014/04/14 03:21, Tim Dunphy wrote:
Thanks for your input. That was exactly what needed to confirm what I
was thinking we'd ought to do. I'm going to go ahead and recommend
that we take the web servers out of the vip pool and instead point the
vip at the two varnish cache nodes. I'm thinking we'll need a
heartbeat established between the two (something like keepalived) to
enable the failover so that each node can assume the identity of the
VIP ip.
you have at least two way:
- active-active with the F5 balancing the varnish node (then the varnish
will balance the 4 web server directly as backends without the F5)
- active-standby without the F5 and with keepalived on the two varnish
node (I have some deployments like this where I also put the two varnish
node, with keepalived for the HA, outside the firewall (the firewall may
be one of the bottleneck on hi traffic sites)
of course the active-standby version with keepalived will NOT use the F5
balancer neither in the frontend nor in the backend.
All I am really still curious about at this point is whether I should
post this section on my first node:
if (req.restarts == 0) {
if (client.ip == "10.10.40.8" || client.ip == "10.10.40.9") {
set req.backend = www;
} elsif (server.ip == "10.10.40.8") {
set req.backend = varnish2;
} else {
set req.backend = varnish1;
}
} elsif (req.restarts >= 2) {
return (pass);
I really cannot undestand this... you will have the same vcl on both the
varnish nodes, and you will have 4 backend (the 4 web server) on them
the F5 vip and the cache ip shoud NOT be backend on your vcl
_______________________________________________
varnish-misc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc
