Linux Cluster Load Balance

Hello,

I have a domain similar to youtube, metacafe, etc. wich is receiving
many visitors. Our 100 Mbps connection is always at 100% usage. We
have one MySQL database and all video files are located in one
directort. We want to purchase another dedicated server but have no
idea on how to load balance both servers. Any ideas on how to achieve
this in a server that uses one MySQL database, Apache & FLV files?

Thanks,

Antoni

On Apr 10, 11:40 am, "Antoni" <antonimassom...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have a domain similar to youtube, metacafe, etc. wich is receiving
> many visitors. Our 100 Mbps connection is always at 100% usage. We
> have one MySQL database and all video files are located in one
> directort. We want to purchase another dedicated server but have no
> idea on how to load balance both servers. Any ideas on how to achieve
> this in a server that uses one MySQL database, Apache & FLV files?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Antoni



You have different options if you decided not to replace your server
with newer/faster/high capacity harddisk,
you can use load balancer - its an opensourse software where you can
share two machines or more. check for balance software.
in the other hand i would prefer Linux virtual server -- check
http://www.linuxvirtualserver.org/ for more info.

cheers,
zaher el siddik

On 11 abr, 10:42, "zouz" <elsid...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Apr 10, 11:40 am, "Antoni" <antonimassom...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hello,
>
> > I have a domain similar to youtube, metacafe, etc. wich is receiving
> > many visitors. Our 100 Mbps connection is always at 100% usage. We
> > have one MySQL database and all video files are located in one
> > directort. We want to purchase another dedicated server but have no
> > idea on how to load balance both servers. Any ideas on how to achieve
> > this in a server that uses one MySQL database, Apache & FLV files?
>
> > Thanks,
>
> > Antoni
>
> You have different options if you decided not to replace your server
> with newer/faster/high capacity harddisk,
> you can use load balancer - its an opensourse software where you can
> share two machines or more. check for balance software.
> in the other hand i would prefer Linux virtual server -- checkhttp://www.linuxvirtualserver.org/for more info.
>
> cheers,
> zaher el siddik

Can I have this configuration using LVS:

Server1: MySQL database.
Server2: Files (video, audio & photos)
Server3: httpd daemon

I don't want to replicate all data and MySQL databases to all servers
since they are eating up my HDD space.

Any ideas?

Thanks

> Can I have this configuration using LVS:
>
> Server1: MySQL database.
> Server2: Files (video, audio & photos)
> Server3: httpd daemon

You can do that without any load-balancer at all. The first step would
be to put the MySQL database on a seperate machine with lots of memory. Let
the second machine store the files and run the HTTP daemon. Unless you're
doing a *ton* of CGI (or have inefficient, bloated, or just
resource-intensive CGI apps), that will handle a TON of traffic. At the
point where you need more httpd machines, then a load-balancer would come
into the picture.

steve

On 11 abr, 12:36, "Steve Wolfe" <h...@codon.com> wrote:
> > Can I have this configuration using LVS:
>
> > Server1: MySQL database.
> > Server2: Files (video, audio & photos)
> > Server3: httpd daemon
>
> You can do that without any load-balancer at all. The first step would
> be to put the MySQL database on a seperate machine with lots of memory. Let
> the second machine store the files and run the HTTP daemon. Unless you're
> doing a *ton* of CGI (or have inefficient, bloated, or just
> resource-intensive CGI apps), that will handle a TON of traffic. At the
> point where you need more httpd machines, then a load-balancer would come
> into the picture.
>
> steve

Hi Steve,

I came across the idea of using a load-balancer with multiple servers
since my 100 Mbps connection is at 100% usage. Since this web is video
streaming I guess I really do need more servers. I have no idea on how
to make this work and load-balancing is not needed.

Thanks!

Hello,

Antoni wrote:

> I came across the idea of using a load-balancer with multiple servers
> since my 100 Mbps connection is at 100% usage. Since this web is video
> streaming I guess I really do need more servers. I have no idea on how
> to make this work and load-balancing is not needed.

If it is just the network load, then try increasing the uplink, either
by more NICs or by faster NICs, perhaps 1Gbps. With more than one NIC
it would be already like a cluster seen from the network, because 2
NICs means two addresses. You would have to find a strategy to share
the network load among both addresses. Using a single 1Gbps NIC is
probably easier.

If after increasing the uplink the machine is 100% CPU or the hard disks
are 100% loaded, then you need more servers to get more. If your
network load is mainly due to large videos, then your maximum network
bandwith per server is determined by the harddisk subsystem. Saturating
even a 1 Gbps NIC with large file transmissions should not be too hard
with a decent RAID configuration.

The reason to build up a cluster would be redundancy. If one machine
fails the other(s) might take over its load. You might find more info
with the keywords "high availability". But this is more involved than
just increasing the uplink.

Bernd Strieder

On Wed, 11 Apr 2007 03:42:38 -0700, Antoni rearranged some electrons to
form:

> On 11 abr, 12:36, "Steve Wolfe" <h...@codon.com> wrote:
>> > Can I have this configuration using LVS:
>>
>> > Server1: MySQL database.
>> > Server2: Files (video, audio & photos)
>> > Server3: httpd daemon
>>
>> You can do that without any load-balancer at all. The first step would
>> be to put the MySQL database on a seperate machine with lots of memory. Let
>> the second machine store the files and run the HTTP daemon. Unless you're
>> doing a *ton* of CGI (or have inefficient, bloated, or just
>> resource-intensive CGI apps), that will handle a TON of traffic. At the
>> point where you need more httpd machines, then a load-balancer would come
>> into the picture.
>>
>> steve
>
> Hi Steve,
>
> I came across the idea of using a load-balancer with multiple servers
> since my 100 Mbps connection is at 100% usage. Since this web is video
> streaming I guess I really do need more servers. I have no idea on how
> to make this work and load-balancing is not needed.
>
> Thanks!

If your network is 100% utilized, addtional servers are not going
to fix your problem, unless you get more network bandwidth.

--
David M (dmacchiarolo)
http://home.triad.rr.com/redsled
T/S 53
sled351 Linux 2.4.18-14 has been up 10 days 1:21