Shri Shrikumar wrote: > > On Wed, 2003-09-17 at 08:50, Markus Oswald wrote: > > Personally I would suggest LVS / keepalived - IMHO it's the > most robust > > and powerful solution you can currently get. Definitely > worth a look... > > > > It's not as hard to setup as you think - you need a little bit of > > experience for planing your cluster setup, but the software > installation > > and configuration is probably the easier part. > > > > I installed/run multiple clusters, some with quite a lot of traffic > > (well, that's what load-balancing is good for) some just > needed the HA > > features. No serious problems with keepalived and no problems at all > > with LVS.
Full ACK. Same here. Runs like a charm for > 2 years. > > Looking at the documentation for LVS, it mentions that it needs two > nodes, a primary node and a backup node which then feeds into n real > servers. > > Does this mean that I will need two additional machines to be > able to do > LVS or would I be able to double up a couple of the webservers as the > nodes ? > You need at least 2 servers, and one director (balancer). In this setup, the director is a SPOF, so running with redundant directors makes sense. Most of our customers started with one director, and upgraded to the second within 3-4 months (when budget permitted or they had the first director failure). Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]