DNS failover? I'd be interested as we're trying to devise a long term
plan for balancing two servers but right now they're in different
physical locations and I need a quick, short-term solution.
Thanks
On Fri, 2003-10-24 at 13:21, cf-talk wrote:
> Barney,
>
>
> So did you purchase an piece of NLB hardware to run in front of your
> boxes or are you using a Linux box to do that? Perhaps you could
> share
> with all of us a few more details of your setup?
>
>
> All I'm really after is the ability to set up four boxes... all
> running
> the exact same thing... and be able to kill any of those boxes at any
> time without the end user being affected. Cheap is nice... easy is
> even
> nicer...
>
>
> The setup right now is DNS based failover but I'm not too impressed by
> it. Basically it's just rewriting DNS records to remove the "dead"
> machine... but it can take several minutes for those DNS changes to
> roll. I want to provide something better than that.
>
>
> Thanks,
> -Novak
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Barney Boisvert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, October 24, 2003 10:13 AM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: RE: CFMX and ClusterCATS?
>
> I just set up a clustered arrangement, but I'm on Linux, so I won't be
> of
> much assistance. We didn't cluster the CF servers directly, but
> rather
> just
> used a load balancer (actually a pair) in front to delegate each
> request
> to
> one of the CF servers. I'm not sure what clustering the CF servers
> directly
> brings to the table, rather than just using an external load balancer.
> Perhaps easier administration (though I doubt that), and the savings
> from
> not having to buy another piece of hardware? All the CF servers then
> connect to a separate DB server, which also has a hot backup.
>
> We can kill any machine in the rack and no one will know. And adding
> more
> CF servers is just a matter of putting it in and running a single
> script
> on
> the primary load balancer. Very nice setup, I think.
>
> cheers,
> barneyb
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cf-talk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, October 24, 2003 9:53 AM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: CFMX and ClusterCATS?
>
> Hi All,
>
> Sorry for the repost... but I can't believe that nobody out there
> has
> any info...
>
> Does anyone here have any experience with CFMX6.1 and clustering?
> I'm
> looking to load balance two T1 connections across 2-4 CFMX boxes.
> But
> before I go and recommend to my clients that this is the way to go,
> I'd
> like to play around with it a little myself.
>
> The platform would be Windows 2000 or Windows 2003 and CFMX 6.1
> Enterprise. From what I've read about ClusterCATS it's supposed to
> install with CFMX right? Is this also true for the trial download of
> CFMX (which is the Enterprise version)? I'd hate to have to purchase
> a
> full blown enterprise version just to test this all out.
>
> As a side note... Windows 2003 has built in clustering which may or
> may
> not do what I need. Basically what I'm looking for is network load
> balancing (NLB) across 2-4 machines. If one machine fails (for any
> reason) I want it to go unnoticed by the customer.
>
> Can someone out there point me in the right direction? I have
> several
> boxes I can use to set this up and test with... Just need a push in
> the
> right direction.
>
> -Novak
>
> _____
>
>
>
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
