On Fri, Jun 01, 2007 at 12:29:40PM +0200, Sebastian Vieira wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was running ldirectord 1.77.2.51 and decided to upgrade to the latest
> version 1.186-ha-2.0.9. Now ldirectord doesn't remove a real-server anymore.
> To illustrate:
>
> ldirectord.cf has one virtual section with one rs
On 7/4/07, Horms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> I finally found some time to look into this problem.
> Yes, it does look like it is somewhat broken.
> Can you see if the attached patches help?
>
Hi,
I'll patch them as soon as possible, do the same tests, and let you know.
Thanks for all the t
On 7/4/07, Horms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I finally found some time to look into this problem.
> Yes, it does look like it is somewhat broken.
> Can you see if the attached patches help?
>
Hi,
The patches work, thank you very much for that. The only minor thing that
remains is when i chang
Hi Ben,
Just tried your tutorial, for some reason, my vmware sometimes hangs or
stops responding upon configuring the LVS, its wierd that it only happens
after the heartbeat starts to run and after a few minutes its stops
responding and just freeze. May i know what version of vmware are you us
Hi
I've had that problem too. I got it working through a tip from somebody on the
vmware forums. I could be wrong but i thought by adding one of the two
parameters to the kernel command line, i eventually got it working:
pci=routeirq
Or
clock=pitr
Else you can also search their forum.
Sebast
Joseph Mack NA3T wrote:
> are both facing the router that delivers the packets to the
> VIP? I think you only need arp_ignore/announce on the
> interface that hears the arp requests.
>
Yes, that's right; I had added it to both in the course of
experimenting, but it should only be
on one of the
Joseph Mack NA3T wrote:
> realserver is an LVS term referring to the machine/node(s)
> that are being loadbalanced by the director.
>
> I've never liked the LVS nomenclature; e.g. "virtual",
> "realserver", but since I couldn't come up with an
> alternative and no-one else seemed to mind, I've j
Gerry Reno wrote:
> Joseph Mack NA3T wrote:
>
>> realserver is an LVS term referring to the machine/node(s)
>> that are being loadbalanced by the director.
>>
>> I've never liked the LVS nomenclature; e.g. "virtual",
>> "realserver", but since I couldn't come up with an
>> alternative and no-
Gerry Reno schrieb:
> Gerry Reno wrote:
>
>> Joseph Mack NA3T wrote:
>>
>>
>>> realserver is an LVS term referring to the machine/node(s)
>>> that are being loadbalanced by the director.
>>>
>>> I've never liked the LVS nomenclature; e.g. "virtual",
>>> "realserver", but since I couldn
How about ... 'server' ? :)
___
LinuxVirtualServer.org mailing list - lvs-users@LinuxVirtualServer.org
Send requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
or go to http://lists.graemef.net/mailman/listinfo/lvs-users
On Wed, 4 Jul 2007, Jacob Smullyan wrote:
> Joseph Mack NA3T wrote:
>>> I gather I'm supposed to add the VIP nowadays on lo.
>>
>> It's the place we've always put it.
>>
>
> But I guess I haven't -- in my 2.4/noarp machines, I have it on the same
> interface that is facing the router, which
> wit
On Wed, 4 Jul 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> How about ... 'server' ? :)
Wensong started the project and he got to define the terms.
Considering he wasn't a native speaker of English, I thought
he did pretty well. When I talked to him about his
nomenclature, he had sound technical reasons fo
Joe,
I just thought I'd put out the gale warning before the hurricane hits is
all. Virtualization is coming like a tidal wave over the next 5 years.
The IT press is going to be covered with it.
Gerry
___
LinuxVirtualServer.org mailing list - lvs-user
Gerry Reno wrote:
> Joe,
> I just thought I'd put out the gale warning before the hurricane hits is
> all. Virtualization is coming like a tidal wave over the next 5 years.
> The IT press is going to be covered with it.
>
> Gerry
>
>
I mean I would not like to go to conferences and see people
On Wed, 4 Jul 2007, Gerry Reno wrote:
> I mean I would not like to go to conferences and see people asking
> questions like, "Is that the real realserver, or is it the real
> virtualserver?" or "Is that the virtual virtualserver or the real
> virtualserver?". We are talking "Confusion!".
The pr
On Wednesday 04 July 2007 18:08, Joseph Mack NA3T wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Jul 2007, Gerry Reno wrote:
>
> > I mean I would not like to go to conferences and see people asking
> > questions like, "Is that the real realserver, or is it the real
> > virtualserver?" or "Is that the virtual virtualserver or
[ Repost as the list didn't like the attacments in the previous one ]
On Fri, Jun 01, 2007 at 12:29:40PM +0200, Sebastian Vieira wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was running ldirectord 1.77.2.51 and decided to upgrade to the latest
> version 1.186-ha-2.0.9. Now ldirectord doesn't remove a real-server anymore.
Fix a logig bug in _status_down() that prevented fallback servers
from being removed if
a) at start no other real servers were present and
b) a real server was subsequently added
The new logic is the logical not of that found in _status_up
With thanks to Sebastian Vieira
Signed-off-by: Simon Ho
Call ld_start() on reload to flush out stale entires.
With thanks to Sebastian Vieira
Signed-off-by: Simon Horman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Index: heartbeat/ldirectord/ldirectord.in
===
--- heartbeat.orig/ldirectord/ldirectord.in 2007
On Mon, Oct 10, 2005 at 10:21:05AM +0100, Struan Bartlett wrote:
> Hi -
>
> I'm new to this list but I hope you'll forgive me getting right to the
> point.
>
> Our organisation is testing a new version of ldirectord - version 1.77.2.6
> from Debian package 1.2.3-9sarge3 - and have encountered a s
I am running Cent/OS 4.x with Kernel 2.6.x
I have setup two load balancers with a hot standby configuration.
I have setup three web servers as real servers.
Everything is setup, works and connects with one key exception.
The configuration is LVS/NAT so the real servers should redirect back
to
On Wed, Jul 04, 2007 at 12:02:10PM +0200, Sebastian Vieira wrote:
> On 7/4/07, Horms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > I finally found some time to look into this problem.
> > Yes, it does look like it is somewhat broken.
> > Can you see if the attached patches help?
> >
>
>
> Hi,
>
> The patch
On 7/5/07, Horms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Thanks. I'm tracking that problem, but its a little trick to fix,
> and as its mainly cosmetic its kind of at the bottom of my list for now.
>
>
Of course, take your time. I might even pick up that Perl book i've got
lying around here. It's highly unl
23 matches
Mail list logo
