Search Results

Search found 5 results on 1 pages for 'lb01'.

Page 1/1 | 1 

  • MySQL port 3306 became filtered when configured with Keepalived on Ubuntu server 12.04 lts

    - by Ludwig
    I'm configuring two load balancer (lb01 & lb02) with keepalived for my two mysql server (db01 & db02) with standard port 3306. There is virtual ip address (192.168.205.10) to access it also act as failover, but somehow the web server in the front can't access this mysql server using vip. Here is my config: Keepalived: Only the mysql part that i added here. LB01: virtual_server 192.168.205.10 3306 { delay_loop 6 lb_algo rr lb_kind DR protocol TCP real_server 192.168.205.4 3306 { weight 10 TCP_CHECK { connect_port 3306 connect_timeout 2 } } } LB02: virtual_server 192.168.205.10 3306 { delay_loop 6 lb_algo rr lb_kind DR protocol TCP real_server 192.168.205.6 3306 { weight 10 TCP_CHECK { connect_port 3306 connect_timeout 2 } } } I already comment out the "bind-address=127.0.0.1" part in both server my.cnf. Also, remove all the firewall prog from my ubuntu server (ufw or iptables). Any help? thanks.

    Read the article

  • SQLS Timeouts - High Reads in Profiler

    - by lb01
    I've audited a SQLS2008 server with Profiler for one day.. the overhead didn't seem to trouble this new client my company has. They are using a legacy VB6 application as a front-end. They're experiencing timeouts once SQLS RAM usage is high. The server is currently running x64 sqls2008 on a VM with nearly 9 GB of RAM. SQL Server's 'max server memory option' is currently set to 6GB. I've put the results of the trace in a table and queried them using this query. SELECT TextData, ApplicationName, Reads FROM [TraceWednesday] WHERE textdata is not null and EventClass = 12 GROUP BY TextData, ApplicationName, Reads ORDER BY Reads DESC As I expected, some values are very high. Top Reads, in pages. 2504188 1965910 1445636 1252433 1239108 1210153 1088580 1072725 Am I correct in thinking that the top one (2504188 pages) is 20033504 KB, which then is roughly ~20'000 MB, 20GB? These queries are often executed and can take quite some time to run. Eventually RAM is used up because of the cache fattening, and timeouts occur once SQL cannot 'splash' pages in the buffer pool as much. Costs go up. Am I correct in my understanding? I've read that I should tune the associated T-SQL and create appropriate indices. Obviously cutting down the I/O would make SQL Server use less RAM. OR, maybe it might just slow down the process of chewing up the whole RAM. If a lot less pages are read, maybe it'll all run much better even when usage is high? (less time swapping, etc.) Currently, our only option is to restart SQL once a week when RAM usage is high, suddenly the timeouts disappear. SQL breathes again. I'm sure lots of DBAs have been in this situation.. I'm asking before I start digging out all of the bad T-SQL and put indices here and there, is there is something else I can do? Any advice except from what I know (not much yet..) Much appreciated. Leo.

    Read the article

  • SQLS Timeouts - High Reads in Profiler

    - by lb01
    Hi I've audited a SQLS2008 server with Profiler for one day.. the overhead didn't seem to trouble this new client my company has. They are using a legacy VB6 application as a front-end. They're experiencing timeouts once SQLS RAM usage is high. The server is currently running x64 sqls2008 on a VM with nearly 9 GB of RAM. SQL Server's 'max server memory option' is currently set to 6GB. I've put the results of the trace in a table and queried them using this query. SELECT TextData, ApplicationName, Reads FROM [TraceWednesday] WHERE textdata is not null and EventClass = 12 GROUP BY TextData, ApplicationName, Reads ORDER BY Reads DESC As I expected, some values are very high. Top Reads, in pages. 2504188 1965910 1445636 1252433 1239108 1210153 1088580 1072725 Am I correct in thinking that the top one (2504188 pages) is 20033504 KB, which then is roughly ~20'000 MB, 20GB? These queries are often executed and can take quite some time to run. Eventually RAM is used up because of the cache fattening, and timeouts occur once SQL cannot 'splash' pages in the buffer pool as much. Costs go up. Am I correct in my understanding? I've read that I should tune the associated T-SQL and create appropriate indices. Obviously cutting down the I/O would make SQL Server use less RAM. OR, maybe it might just slow down the process of chewing up the whole RAM. If a lot less pages are read, maybe it'll all run much better even when usage is high? (less time swapping, etc.) Currently, our only option is to restart SQL once a week when RAM usage is high, suddenly the timeouts disappear. SQL breathes again. I'm sure lots of DBAs have been in this situation.. I'm asking before I start digging out all of the bad T-SQL and put indices here and there, is there is something else I can do? Any advice except from what I know (not much yet..) Much appreciated. Leo.

    Read the article

  • Nagios NTP, discarding peer

    - by picca
    We're using nagios *check_ntp_time* for monitoring time on our servers. Unfortunately the service is flapping. And reporting a lot of false-positives. It happens everytime for random server in random day time and lasts for ~10-30 minutes. When the problem occurs we get: watch01:~ # /usr/lib/nagios/plugins/check_ntp_time -H lb01 -w 1 -c 2 -v sending request to peer 0 response from peer 0: offset 0.07509887218 sending request to peer 0 response from peer 0: offset 0.07508444786 sending request to peer 0 response from peer 0: offset 0.07499825954 sending request to peer 0 response from peer 0: offset 0.07510817051 discarding peer 0: stratum=0 overall average offset: 0 NTP CRITICAL: Offset unknown| When everything is ok, we get (I used different server to not have to wait): watch01:~ # /usr/lib/nagios/plugins/check_ntp_time -H web02 -w 1 -c 2 -v sending request to peer 0 response from peer 0: offset 0.0002282857895 sending request to peer 0 response from peer 0: offset 0.0002194643021 sending request to peer 0 response from peer 0: offset 0.0002347230911 sending request to peer 0 response from peer 0: offset 0.0002293586731 overall average offset: 0.0002282857895 NTP OK: Offset 0.0002282857895 secs|offset=0.000228s;1.000000;2.000000; We are using: check_ntp_time v1.4.15 (nagios-plugins 1.4.15) on Debian squeeze. Remote ntp daemon is: ntpd - NTP daemon program - Ver. 4.2.4p4 I already found some forums where the problem is described: 1, 2, 3. Every time they edvise to upgrade nagios-plugins, because in version prior to 1.4.13 there was a bug with inserted leap second. But we have already newer version of nagios-plugins.

    Read the article

  • Keepalived for more than 20 virtual addresses

    - by cvaldemar
    I have set up keepalived on two Debian machines for high availability, but I've run into the maximum number of virtual IP's I can assign to my vrrp_instance. How would I go about configuring and failing over 20+ virtual IP's? This is the, very simple, setup: LB01: 10.200.85.1 LB02: 10.200.85.2 Virtual IPs: 10.200.85.100 - 10.200.85.200 Each machine is also running Apache (later Nginx) binding on the virtual IPs for SSL client certificate termination and proxying to backend webservers. The reason I need so many VIP's is the inability to use VirtualHost on HTTPS. This is my keepalived.conf: vrrp_script chk_apache2 { script "killall -0 apache2" interval 2 weight 2 } vrrp_instance VI_1 { interface eth0 state MASTER virtual_router_id 51 priority 101 virtual_ipaddress { 10.200.85.100 . . all the way to . 10.200.85.200 } An identical configuration is on the BACKUP machine, and it's working fine, but only up to the 20th IP. I have found a HOWTO discussing this problem. Basically, they suggest having just one VIP and routing all traffic "via" this one IP, and "all will be well". Is this a good approach? I'm running pfSense firewalls in front of the machines. Quote from the above link: ip route add $VNET/N via $VIP or route add $VNET netmask w.x.y.z gw $VIP Thanks in advance. EDIT: @David Schwartz said it would make sense to add a route, so I tried adding a static route to the pfSense firewall, but that didn't work as I expected it would. pfSense route: Interface: LAN Destination network: 10.200.85.200/32 (virtual IP) Gateway: 10.200.85.100 (floating virtual IP) Description: Route to VIP .100 I also made sure I had packet forwarding enabled on my hosts: $ cat /etc/sysctl.conf net.ipv4.ip_forward=1 net.ipv4.ip_nonlocal_bind=1 Am I doing this wrong? I also removed all VIPs from the keepalived.conf so it only fails over 10.200.85.100.

    Read the article

1