If minimizing downtime is a concern, then you might not want to serve up the code from a share. It's common in a load-balanced environment to take one or more web servers out of rotation, upgrade their code, then re-introduce them -- then take the other ones out, upgrade code, and bring them back into the load balancer.
You do have a complication with mediawiki in that sometimes running the update.php maintenance script will make changes to the database. Then you have a split environment where some web servers can talk to the database and others might throw errors on schema differences. Can be tricky. Hopefully your use case is more simple and you can get away with sharing the codebase. Larry Silverman Chief Technology Officer TrackAbout, Inc. On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 1:03 PM, Daniel Renfro <dren...@vistaprint.com> wrote: > OHYEAH, files! > > I suggest mounting an NFS share on both webservers so they will write to > the same place. If you're going to do this for images, I think it should be > done for the entire MW installation. Then you never have to worry about > each webserver being on a different version -- every webserver is serving > up the same code. > > \\daniel renfro > > > -----Original Message----- > From: mediawiki-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto: > mediawiki-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Bill Traynor > Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2014 1:51 PM > To: MediaWiki announcements and site admin list > Subject: Re: [MediaWiki-l] synchronizing two MW servers > > On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 1:44 PM, Daniel Renfro <dren...@vistaprint.com> > wrote: > > Cheers Bill, > > > > If both webservers are using a single database, then their data should > be synchronized. What other things are you looking to synchronize? > > What about the files? Specifically the images directory. > > > > > You might want to look into setting up a distributed caching system > (hint: use memcached [1].) This will share the cache amongst the > webservers. You might also want to put the codebase on an NFS drive and > mount it on each of the webservers. If you are looking into building a > scalable MediaWiki installation, I would strongly advise taking a look into > Puppet [2]. > > > > Thanks, this is great info. Unfortunately, I don't have full control over > the environment, but I will make these suggestions. > > > \\daniel renfro > > > > [1.] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Memcached > > [2.] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puppet_(software) > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: mediawiki-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org > > [mailto:mediawiki-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Bill > > Traynor > > Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2014 12:09 PM > > To: MediaWiki announcements and site admin list > > Subject: [MediaWiki-l] synchronizing two MW servers > > > > I have 2 application servers behind a load-balancer that both point to a > 3rd server where the database lives. I'm curious if there are any best > practices around keeping the two MediaWiki servers synchronized? > > > > I found Extension:WikiSync > > (http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:WikiSync) but it doesn't look > like it's still developed. > > > > I assume Wikimedia does this now, anyone know how? > > > > Thanks > > Bill > > > > _______________________________________________ > > MediaWiki-l mailing list > > To unsubscribe, go to: > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l > > _______________________________________________ > > MediaWiki-l mailing list > > To unsubscribe, go to: > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l > > _______________________________________________ > MediaWiki-l mailing list > To unsubscribe, go to: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l > _______________________________________________ > MediaWiki-l mailing list > To unsubscribe, go to: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l > _______________________________________________ MediaWiki-l mailing list To unsubscribe, go to: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l
