On 01/06/2011 05:01 PM, Angelo Höngens wrote:
(sorry for top posting, damn Outlook)
Just to second Willy's story, this is how a lot of people do it, including us.
We use pacemaker for high availability, and dnr rr for loadbalancing.
For example we have a 4-node cluster running varnish and haproxy. In this case
I have 4 virtual ipv4-addresses and 4 virtual ipv6 addresses on the cluster. We
use pacemaker to keep the virtual ip's up, and we use dns round-robin to
balance the load. We get nice equal load balancing this way, and if a node is
down (or I want to do maintenance), the vip's move to other nodes, and they
take the extra load.
Thanks for the information. Both Willy and you refer to DNS RR as a load
balancing solution, but I don't really understand that point: if
caching, etc... means hostname->load balancer resolution is random, the
load balancing will likely be very unbalanced, no ?
cheers,
David
