RedHat Cluster Suite and Piranha

Discussion in 'Linux Networking' started by Doug Farrell, Apr 21, 2004.

  1. Doug Farrell

    Doug Farrell Guest

    Hi all,

    I'm trying to set up an IP load balancer using the RedHat Cluster
    Suite software and RedHat Enterprise Linux. I've got four identical
    Dell servers I'm working with (test system), two will be the load
    balancers (active and backup) and two will be the backend server farm.
    My questions is this, is it possible to set this system up using only
    one machine to be the load balancer? The Cluster Suite documentation
    makes it look like you HAVE to have a backup machine for the load
    balancer, is this true or not? Anyone have any suggestions or ideas
    about that, I'd be glad to hear them.

    Thanks in advance,
    Doug Farrell
     
    Doug Farrell, Apr 21, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1
    NotDashEscaped: You need GnuPG to verify this message

    What sense makes your cluster, if you still have a single point
    of failure?

    --
    Michael Heiming (GPG-Key ID: 0xEDD27B94)

    Remove +SIGNS and www. if you expect an answer, sorry for
    inconvenience, but I get tons of spam.
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFAhsh0AkPEju3Se5QRAupsAJ9kAc44ypxAMAXjzT4avPRN0Uat9gCgndwL
    J8LUkEvgrLyIfr9yTR3dwjA=
    =0/4f
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
     
    Michael Heiming, Apr 21, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Doug Farrell

    Steve Wolfe Guest

    I'm trying to set up an IP load balancer using the RedHat Cluster
    Capacity?

    It's a lot cheaper to dish out large quanitites of web content (and some
    other services) with small clustered machines than to use one large
    machine, and using a load balancer will give you a bit better control than
    round-robbin DNS will, and not everyone needs "five-nines".

    steve
     
    Steve Wolfe, Apr 21, 2004
    #3
  4. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1
    NotDashEscaped: You need GnuPG to verify this message

    You have ever run a larger site (>10^6 hits/24h)? You know how
    much traffic Linux/apache can handle easily on a reasonable box?

    BTW
    Linuxvirtualserver doesn't need an external load balancer it's
    built in.;)

    --
    Michael Heiming - RHCE (GPG-Key ID: 0xEDD27B94)

    Remove +SIGNS and www. if you expect an answer, sorry for
    inconvenience, but I get tons of spam.
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFAhuA/AkPEju3Se5QRAtuHAJ0cUIliboHuAgmqfhtoddhmUBe/HgCfZ/5U
    YD7Ogbl+UlGfUh9q+yZ6Lsw=
    =gbzo
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
     
    Michael Heiming, Apr 21, 2004
    #4
  5. Doug Farrell

    Steve Wolfe Guest

    It's a lot cheaper to dish out large quanitites of web content (and
    some
    Less than 10^6 hits/day, but not *much* less.

    Yes, of course I know how much Linux/Apache can handle on a reasonable
    box. However, have you ever run a larger site, where content generation
    involves manipulating data from lots of different sources?

    If it were nothing but a bandwidth matter, Google could probably make do
    with a handful of dual-Xeons.
    Yes, it's built in, but it's fairly traditional to have one machine acting
    as the load balancer (or "director"), and others serving web content. LVS
    does let you have a local server, but it's not exactly the optimal for
    regular operation.

    steve
     
    Steve Wolfe, Apr 22, 2004
    #5
  6. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1
    NotDashEscaped: You need GnuPG to verify this message

    Yep, I think so. From experience, crappy written SQL, does suck
    the hell out of a db server, no matter how larger the system is.
    There's often much room for improvements which doesn't cost extra
    money, but is easily ignored. Throwing hw on the problem is not
    uncommon.
    Just a hint for the OP that he doesn't really need one.
    During the time of kernel 2.2.x, did run a LVS cluster it worked
    very well, only some minor problem while syncing the static
    content. Today one could use GFS or alike for shared storage
    between members. Sure a load-balancer has pros, but the OP didn't
    sound as he would really need one.

    --
    Michael Heiming - RHCE (GPG-Key ID: 0xEDD27B94)

    Remove +SIGNS and www. if you expect an answer, sorry for
    inconvenience, but I get tons of spam.
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFAiD+BAkPEju3Se5QRAmA2AKCEVZYDHvK7v0jWg2BTU0ZcIQ65BACdE4Ai
    ydAZKi2VQ57v7xU5/0rQCr4=
    =BgOH
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
     
    Michael Heiming, Apr 22, 2004
    #6
  7. Doug Farrell

    Doug Farrell Guest

    Hi everyone, OP here,

    Thank you all for your comments, though no one really answered my
    original question about whether or not the RedHat Cluster Suite IP
    Load balancer could be setup to use one machine rather than two.

    I agree with an early comment that having one load balancer creates a
    single point of failure, but our system already has a mirror system so
    that's less of an issue. The problem I'm trying to solve is server
    load. Right now if one of our mirror sites goes down, the other site
    can't handle all the load. Each site consists of one server that hosts
    one of our products. So what I'm trying to do is add capacity within
    the mirror site. Once I have the load balancer in place (at both sites
    eventually), I can add additional back-end servers as the need arises.

    Anyway, thanks for your responses,
    Doug Farrell
     
    Doug Farrell, Apr 23, 2004
    #7
  8. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1
    NotDashEscaped: You need GnuPG to verify this message

    You got some support with Redhat Enterprise Linux, I'd simply ask
    RH.

    [..]

    --
    Michael Heiming (GPG-Key ID: 0xEDD27B94)

    Remove +SIGNS and www. if you expect an answer, sorry for
    inconvenience, but I get tons of spam.
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFAiSEGAkPEju3Se5QRAizRAKCTVmUrFMfuwv9pjh+ei4DkqykM8QCfUCL4
    b7WarBERuECpGyOLeD8E2lQ=
    =tU++
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
     
    Michael Heiming, Apr 23, 2004
    #8
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.