[CentOS] Load Balancing

Tue May 23 22:34:41 UTC 2006
Mace Eliason <meliason at shaw.ca>

I guess that wouldn't work for load balancing though

Mace Eliason wrote:
> From what I have learned reading.  What do people think about using 
> heart beat between two boxes, rsync to sync the www directories and 
> other files, and use mysql replication?
> My only question is I have found in the system that I setup with mysql 
> replication it worked great but if you remove one of the servers and 
> put it back in you have to stop mysql and copy over the newer database 
> and then restart both to get it to replicate correctly.
> Is there a way to get replication to work so it will automatically 
> sync the master and slave without having to stop and copy and restart?
> Bowie Bailey wrote:
>> Fabian Arrotin wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2006-05-23 at 12:49 -0700, Dan Trainor wrote:
>>>>> For the backend storage, it depends what's your budget ... :o)
>>>>> A minimal setup is to use nfs on a central server to host/share
>>>>> the same data across all your machines ... the problem in this
>>>>> config is that the nfs server becomes the single point of failure
>>>>> ... so why not using a simple heartbeat solution for 2 nfs
>>>>> servers acting as one and uses drdb between these 2 nodes for the
>>>>> replication ... Other method is to have a dedicate san with hba in 
>>>>> each
>>>>> webservers but that's another budget ... :o)
>>>>> Just my two cents ...
>>>> HI, Fabian -
>>>> I've been toying aroudn with both NFS and GFS, but NFS does leave me
>>>> with a single point of failure.  I'd rather not use something like
>>>> drdb, however.  I'm still researching GFS to see if it's a viable
>>>> alternative for what I'm looking for.
>>>> Thanks!
>>>> -dant
>>> GFS can do the job, but in this case you should have a real shared
>>> storage to permit all the servers to access the shared data in the
>>> same time ...
>>> If you don't want to invest a lot, you can still use iscsi but the
>>> single point of failure still exists ...
>> It tends to be expensive to do away with all points of failure.  The
>> best you can do on a budget is try to limit your points of failure to
>> things that tend to have a long lifespan (i.e. almost anything other
>> than servers and individual hard drives).
>> For another (relatively) low-cost option, check out the AoE storage
>> appliances from Coraid.com.  Mine is still in testing, but it was very
>> easy to configure with CentOS4 and I haven't found any problems with
>> it so far.  I currently have a 1.2TB storage area shared between three
>> CentOS servers with GFS.
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS at centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos