Problem here is that lot of traffic is generated internally by server
hosted by other projects within same co. now this need to be load
balanced. If we used geo then 70% of our traffic will be stuck on one
site. If all our clients were browser based then it would have been
easier.
> 2011/4/4 Brian Moon <br...@moonspot.net>:
>> We are active/active as well. But, we use geo dns so that people only get
>> DNS for one data center. Having someone be able to hit any datacenter in the
>> world at any time without any temporary loss of service is not reasonable. I
>> don't care who you are. Even Google sticks you to a geo-regional based
>> datacenter.
>>
>> Brian.
>> http://brian.moonspot.net
>>
>> On 4/4/11 5:39 PM, Mohit Anchlia wrote:
>>>
>>> That is already in place but business requirement is to do
>>> active/active hence need for more complicated solution.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 3:32 PM, Brian Moon<br...@moonspot.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Use geo dns instead to stick users to a single datacenter and only fail
>>>> over
>>>> to the other data center when there is an issue. This will be much less
>>>> of a
>>>> headache than trying to move cache data back and forth over the net.
>>>>
>>>> Brian.
>>>> http://brian.moonspot.net
>>>>
>>>> On 4/4/11 3:03 PM, Mo wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> We have multiple data centers and are now planning to make this
>>>>> application active/active. Which means user can be load balanced. User
>>>>> generally uploads a file and it should be accessible on both sites.
>>>>>
>>>>> We expect it will take upto 1 hr to replicate files in worst case
>>>>> scenario and we are not able to come up with good solution since
>>>>> cookies wouldn't work for us.
>>>>>
>>>>> What we really need is someway of storing User and Site eg: User A
>>>>> visited site X. Based on that information we can then redirect user to
>>>>> correct site. After one hour this info will expire and generate new
>>>>> info.
>>>>>
>>>>> I am planning to use memcached on httpd apache server accross 2 data
>>>>> centers to keep cache in sync.
>>>>>
>>>>> I understand latency will be a factor but I am assuming we can also do
>>>>> async and it shouldn't be that slow since we are only talking about
>>>>> small set of data.
>>>>>
>>>>> Need help from experienced users if they have any good suggestions on
>>>>> how to do this.
>>>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Roberto Spadim
> Spadim Technology / SPAEmpresarial
>
