Search Results

Search found 18964 results on 759 pages for 'network balancing'.

Page 57/759 | < Previous Page | 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64  | Next Page >

  • implementing NGINX loadbalancer

    - by Alaa Alomari
    I have two servers (ServerA 192.168.1.10, ServerB 192,168.1.11) and DNS of test.mysite.com is pointing to ServerA #in serverA i have this upstream lb_units { server 192.168.1.10 weight=2 max_fails=3 fail_timeout=30s; # Reverse proxy to BES1 server 192.168.1.11 weight=2 max_fails=3 fail_timeout=30s; # Reverse proxy to BES2 } server { listen 80; # Listen on the external interface server_name test.mysite.com; # The server name root /var/www/test; index index.php; location / { proxy_pass http://lb_units; # Load balance the URL location "/" to the upstream lb_units } location ~ \.php$ { include /etc/nginx/fastcgi_params; fastcgi_pass 127.0.0.1:9000; fastcgi_index index.php; fastcgi_param SCRIPT_FILENAME /var/www/test/$fastcgi_script_name; } } and ServerB is apache and it has the following <VirtualHost *:80 RewriteEngine on <Directory "/var/www/test" AllowOverride all </Directory DocumentRoot "/var/www/test" ServerName test.mysite.com </VirtualHost but whenever i try to browse test.mysite.com, it serves me from ServerA. also i tried to mark serverA and down server 192.168.1.10 down; in lb_units and still the same, serving me from serverA. any idea what i have done wrong??

    Read the article

  • Amazon EC2 Web server in Load Balancer gives 503

    - by dale
    we've been running our web servers at Amazon with load balancer and auto-scaling for over a year with no problem. All of a sudden today the request began to get aborted with the error: 503 ... Backend server is at capacity The web servers are at 1% CPU and no other alarms trigger. We use Amazons load balancer and nginx. Lots of requests like this are showing up in the access_log. 10.246.114.93 - - [05/Jun/2014:20:16:09 +0000] "-" 400 0 "-" "-" 10.246.114.93 - - [05/Jun/2014:20:16:09 +0000] "-" 400 0 "-" "-" 10.246.114.93 - - [05/Jun/2014:20:16:09 +0000] "-" 400 0 "-" "-" 10.246.114.93 - - [05/Jun/2014:20:16:09 +0000] "-" 400 0 "-" "-" 10.246.114.93 - - [05/Jun/2014:20:16:10 +0000] "-" 400 0 "-" "-" 10.246.114.93 - - [05/Jun/2014:20:16:10 +0000] "-" 400 0 "-" "-" 10.246.114.93 - - [05/Jun/2014:20:16:10 +0000] "-" 400 0 "-" "-" 10.229.15.214 - - [05/Jun/2014:20:16:10 +0000] "-" 400 0 "-" "-" 10.229.15.214 - - [05/Jun/2014:20:16:10 +0000] "-" 400 0 "-" "-" Any thoughts?

    Read the article

  • Can I use a micro ec2 instance as a load balancer for my other large ec2 instances?

    - by Ryan Detzel
    The issue I'm having is I want to upgrade that instance often(security patches, etc) but I'm affriad something will fail and the site will be down. So, I want to have another server setup and load balance between the two that way I can easily disable one, upgrade it and once it's working add it back in the mix and repeat. What kind of machine is needed for a load balancer? Would the micro instance work just fine? The site gets anywhere from 3-10k hits/day. I plan on using nginx as the load balancer.

    Read the article

  • Scaling a LAMP website hosted on EC2

    - by Gublooo
    Hello, I'm very new to all this - I've recently managed to launch my website on EC2. As next step, I want to learn how to scale the website. I have a general idea but wanted some input from the experts about how to go about it. My website is based on LAMP but also has Red5 server which allows users to record messages and also used for playing them back. Currently this is the architecture I'm planning to setup for initial scaling. Deploy four small EC2 instances for the following purposes: Instance-1: On this instance I will run the MySql database Instance-2: On this instance I will run the red5 server Instance-3 & Instance-4 These 2 instances will be used to deploy the website and will have Apache running on them. They will communicate with the mysql server on Instance-1 and red5 server on Instance-2 using the internal IP address. As an when required, I will launch another instance of the same EBS - I will have EBS of say 50 GIG where all the mysql data will be stored. Also red5 will use this EBS to store the video messages Load-Balancer - Use the load balancer provided by Amazon to load balance Instance-3 and Instance-4 This is what I have in mind. I could be way off so please bear with me. Also I have not taken into account the case of scaling MySql server as I currently have no idea about how that will be done and whether or not it is necessary initially. I am aware that Amazon provides auto scaling and mysql scaling as well but I dont want to get into that right now. Your feedback is appreciated Thanks

    Read the article

  • PHP on several servers with session-sharing

    - by Etu
    there's certanly other threads about this, but I have one more question. We are about to scale the website at work to have more than one server. And we need to share the sessions between the servers. We have been looking into different solutions, one in memcached and use Memcached as sessionhandler in PHP. That will probably work. And the idea would be to run memcached on every machine and let all webservers access all other servers memcached servers, and then we have shared sessions between the machines, yay. (we have no resources to setup with sticky-sessions yet, that's a later project. we need this running, and we need this running now. and we will loadbalance with DNS for a starter) But then... If I want to take one server down, say, for maintenance, or a server crashes, or whatever reason. I don't want the users to just loose their sessions and have to start from the beginning... That's why we need some kind of replication, which Memcached does not support. Then I found http://repcached.lab.klab.org/ -- which has multi-master replication of memcached, which is great, and is what I want. But does it work with 2 machines? Say 3, 5, 10? For future scaling. I also looked into redishttp://redis.io/ -- which also seems great, but is a bit more "shaky" with the php-session-handler support, and no multi-master-replication. The thing is that I like to use memcached, but I want to be able to power down one of two boxes without loosing half of the sessions. Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • How do I mirror a MySQL database?

    - by user45745
    I'm running two load balanced servers for one website, and I'd like the databases to be synchronized. Queries may be run on either of the two servers because they are both production sites, so the replication can't just work one way. It doesn't have to be in real-time, just fairly accurate so people don't notice a difference when they get switched to a different server.

    Read the article

  • Varnish : Non-Cache/Data Fetch + Load-Balance

    - by xperator
    Someone commented at my previous question and said it's possible to do this with Varnish: Instead of : Client Request Varnish LB Backend Varnish LB Client I want to have (Direct reply from backend to client, instead of going through the LB) : Client Request Varnish LB Backend Client This is not working : sub vcl_pass { if (req.http.host ~ "^(www.)?example.com$") { set req.backend = baz; return (pass); } }

    Read the article

  • linux multipath routing load balance

    - by user52883
    I would like to know how to load balance two Business DLS links which have fixed IPs. I believe it would look something like this: ip route add default scope global \ nexthop via gatewayDLS1 dev interface1 weight 1 \ nexthop via gatewayDLS2 dev interface2 weight 1 Is this be all I need in order to get multipath routing? Please, give me a more detailed answer if possible, thanks you.

    Read the article

  • Deploying Sharepoint Features in a Load Balanced Environment

    - by Adam
    Last night we deployed a new set of Sharepoint features to a load balanced environment. For some reason the new features are on 1 box but are not showing in the sharepoint sites on the others. We have 4 servers and we deployed to them by pulling 1 server out of rotation, stopping the app pool and deploying our new code and the new features. Then we would fire it back up and add it to the rotation. For the remaining servers we would only remove the server from rotation, stop the app pool, and deploy the code, NOT the features, then fire it back up and add it to the rotation. Any thoughts on why the features are not showing up on the other servers? Also, any thoughts on forcing the features to show up? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Load balancers, multiple data centers and url based routing

    - by kunkunur
    There is one data center - dc1. There is a business need to setup another data center - dc2 in another geography and there might be more in the future say dc3. Within the data center dc1: There are two web servers say WS1 and WS2. These two webservers do not share anything currently. There isnt any necessity foreseen to have more webservers within each dc. dc1 also has a local load balancer which has been setup with session stickiness. So if a user say u1 lands on dc1 and if the load balancer decides to route his first request to WS1 then from there on all u1's requests will get routed to WS1. Local load balancer and webservers are invisible to the user. Local load balancer listens to the traffic on a virtual ip which is assigned to the virtual cluster of webservers ws1 and ws2. Virtual ip is the ip to which the host name is resolved to in the DNS. There are no client specific subdomains as of now instead there is a client specific url(context). ex: www.example.com/client1 and www.example.com/client2. Given above when dc2 is onboarded I want to route the traffic between dc1 and dc2 based on the client. The options that I have found so far are. Have client specific subdomains e.g. client1.example.com and client2.example.com and assign each of them with the virtual ip of the data center to which I want to route them. or Assign www.example.com and www1.example.com to first dc i.e. dc1 and assign www2.example.com to dc2. All requests will first get routed to dc1 where WS1 and WS2 will redirect the user to www1.example.com or www2.example.com based on whether the url ends with /client1 or /client2. I need help in the following If I setup a global load balancer between dc1 and dc2 do I have any alternative solutions. That is, can a global load balancer route the traffic based on the url ? Are there drawbacks to subdomain based solutions compared to www1 solution? With www1 solution I am worried that it creates a dependency on dc1 atleast for the first request and the user will see that he is getting redirected to a different url.

    Read the article

  • Loadbalancing with nginx and tomcat

    - by London
    Hello this should be fairly easy to answer for any system admin, the problem is that I'm not server admin but I have to complete this task, I'm very close but still not managing to do it. Here is what I mean, I have two tomcat instance running on machine1 and machine2. People usually access those by visiting urls : http://machine1:8080/appName http://machine2:9090/appName The problem is when I setup nginx with domain name i.e domain.com, nginx sends requests to http://machine1:8080/ and http://machine2:9090/ instead of http://machine1:8080/ and http://machine2:9090/appName Here is my configuration (very basic as it can be noted) : upstream backend { server machine1:8080; server machine2:9090; } server { listen 80; server_name www.mydomain.com mydomain.com; location / { # needed to forward user's IP address to rails proxy_set_header X-Real-IP $remote_addr; # needed for HTTPS proxy_set_header X-Forwarded-For $proxy_add_x_forwarded_for; proxy_set_header Host $http_host; proxy_redirect off; proxy_max_temp_file_size 0; proxy_pass http://backend; } #end location } #end server What changes must I do to do the following : - when user visits mydomain.com - transfer him to either machine1:8080/appName or machine2:9090 Thank you

    Read the article

  • LVS / IPVS difference in ActiveConn since upgrading

    - by Hans
    I've recently migrated from an old version of LVS / ldirectord (Ultra Monkey) to a new Debian install with ldirectord. Now the amount of Active Connections is usually higher than the amount of Inactive Connections, it used to be the other way around. Basically on the old load balancer the connections looked something like: -> RemoteAddress:Port Forward Weight ActiveConn InActConn -> 10.84.32.21:0 Masq 1 12 252 -> 10.84.32.22:0 Masq 1 18 368 However since migrating it to the new load balancer it looks more like: -> RemoteAddress:Port Forward Weight ActiveConn InActConn -> 10.84.32.21:0 Masq 1 313 141 -> 10.84.32.22:0 Masq 1 276 183 Old load balancer: Debian 3.1 ipvsadm 1.24 ldirectord 1.2.3 New load balancer: Debian 6.0.5 ipvsadm 1.25 ldirectord 1.0.3 (I guess the versioning system changed) Is it because the old load balancer was running a kernel from 2005, and ldirectord from 2004, and things have simply changed in the past 7 - 8 years? Did I miss some sysctl settings that I should be enforcing for it to behave in the same way? Everything appears to be working fine but can anyone see an issue with this behaviour? Thanks in advance! Additional info: I'm using LVS in masquerading mode, the real servers have the load balancer as their gateway. The real servers are running Apache, which hasn't changed during the upgrade. The boxes themselves show roughly the same amount of Inactive Connections shown in ipvsadm.

    Read the article

  • Apache mod_remoteip and access logs

    - by GioMac
    Since Apache 2.4 I've started using mod_remoteip instead of mod_extract_forwarded for rewriting client address from x-forwarded-for provided by frontend servers (varnish, squid, apache etc). So far everything works fine with the modules, i.e. php, cgi, wsgi etc... - client addresses are shown as they should be, but I couldn't write client address in access logs (%a, %h, %{c}a). No luck - I'm always getting 127.0.0.1 (localhost forward ex.). How to log client's ip address when using mod_remoteip?

    Read the article

  • Possible to redirect from HTTPS to HTTP behind load-balancer?

    - by Derek Hunziker
    I have a basic ASP.NET application that sits behind an F5 load-balancer. Incoming SSL requests (over HTTPS) terminate at the load-balancer and all internal communication between the load-balancer and my application servers is unsecure (over HTTP). When a unsecure request comes in, my app is able to use Response.Redirect("https://...") to redirect a secure URL with no problems. However, the other direction appears to be impossible - I cannot redirect from HTTPS to HTTP using Response.Redirect() from my application. The URL remains HTTPS for the client and does not change. Could the F5 be preventing the redirect for ever reaching the client? Is there any special configuration necessary to let this happen?

    Read the article

  • How do I move an Amazon micro instance to a small instance?

    - by Navetz
    I want to move my instance to a micro instance to a small instance but when I try to launch a new AMI based on my Micro instance AMI it only gives me the option for 64 bit instances. My initial ami is based off an ubuntu 10.04 image. Is it not possible to move between 64 bit and 32 bit instance? Would it be possible to use a load balancer to have a 32bit instance and a 64bit instance work together? I have a website/web app that I will be uploading huge volumes of data to. I will be starting with 65gigs of images and then moving up to 100+ gigs of images. I am not sure which instance type would be best for this. I was going to use a load balancer and auto scaling to increase the number of instance when the load is high. Also when using a load balancer, does one of the AMI instance become the primary image and the rest act as clones of it?

    Read the article

  • How can one domain route to an always-changing pool of servers?

    - by ryeguy
    I'm sure this is an easy solution, I'm just not too familiar with how DNS works or if that's even related to this problem. If I'm running a web service on amazon ec2, distributed across many instances, how can I make it so a single domain name can be used to access the entire pool of servers, which will be changing from time to time? Since the instances may be present one second but gone the next (and vice versa), I need a way to randomly pick an active member of the cluster to route to. The updates would have to be instantaneous. Is this even possible, with dns caching and all?

    Read the article

  • connections in FIN_WAIT and CLOSE_WAIT state

    - by Raj
    I would like to elaborate the setup so You guys can understand the question and answer more accurately. I have HAProxy as load-balancer, 4 webservers (apache 2.2.3) and one database server (MySQL 5). I am monitoring these servers by nagios. I have disabled the keepalive on apache as we have only 8GB of memory. Now what happens whenever I receive alerts for high memory and cpu utilization, I have observed that the connections from apache to database server hang in established mode (keepalive with timeout value of 7200) and at other side means connections between haproxy and apache shows status as FIN_WAIT on haproxy server and CLOSE_WAIT at apache side. I also see the huge memory swapping and apache taking the most of the memory. I did strace on apache process and did not find any information. strace gets attached to apache process but did not produce any output. The processlist on Mysql server show s those processes in sleep mode. The application on webserver is Magento a php application. if you need further information please let me know. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Cisco AnyConnect VPN client - prevent connecting as work network

    - by Opmet
    From Windows 7 I'm using "Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client 3.0" to connect to our corporate network. Every time I establish the VPN connection Windows will set the type as "work network". I don't want this. So I go to "network and sharing center" and manually / interactively change it to "public network". But I have to repeat it for every new VPN connection. Is there any way to make Windows remember / persist this configuration? Can it be configured in the VPN client? Do our IT admins need to change something at server end? Motivation: A "work network" per default uses different firewall settings that allows for stuff like "network discovery" and "file shares". But I just need "remote desktop" (mstsc). Additional info: Our IT admins claimed this would be Windows default behaviour and there was nothing we could do about it: Windows would always initiate a VPN connection as "work network". Based on this statement I assume this is a "general" issue and went ahead posting here (at superuser.com).

    Read the article

  • How to divert traffic based on hostname using HAProxy?

    - by Bosky
    I've had some initial success with HAProxy setting up a bunch of app servers listening on various other ports. I now have another webserver listening on one port, and i'd like to what changes to make to my config to flow traffic by hostname as well. The following is the current setup, assuming: my apache webserver is running at examplecom:8001 my bunch of app servers 0.0.0.0:8081, 0.0.0.0:8082 , 0.0.0.0:8083 global log 127.0.0.1 local0 log 127.0.0.1 local1 notice maxconn 4096 debug #quiet #user haproxy #group haproxy defaults log global mode http option httplog option dontlognull retries 3 redispatch maxconn 2000 contimeout 5000 clitimeout 50000 srvtimeout 50000 listen appservers 0.0.0.0:80 mode http balance roundrobin option httpclose option forwardfor #option httpchk HEAD /check.txt HTTP/1.0 server inst1 0.0.0.0:8081 cookie server01 check inter 2000 fall 3 server inst2 0.0.0.0:8082 cookie server02 check inter 2000 fall 3 server inst3 0.0.0.0:8083 cookie server01 check inter 2000 fall 3 server inst4 0.0.0.0:8084 cookie server02 check inter 2000 fall 3 capture cookie vgnvisitor= len 32 (any other comments on the ^ setup are welcome.) Now I'd like to continue the same above, but in addition in case - if the hostname is myspecialtopleveldomain<dot>com, then would like to flow traffic to example<dot>com:8001 ~B

    Read the article

  • create a CNAME record for AWS LoadBalancer DNS name

    - by t q
    I am trying to setup a loadBalancer on AWS. The A-Record it gave me looks like myLoadBalancer-**********.us-east-1.elb.amazonaws.com however when i try to put that in my domain registrars A-Record, i get an errorIP address is not valid. Must be of type x.x.x.x where x is 0-255. amazons solution is you should create a CNAME record for the LoadBalancer DNS name, or use Amazon Route 53 to create a hosted zone. route 53 gives me DNS numbers but if i use that then my email doesnt work from the registrar. question: is there a way to use route 53 and retain my emails? or should i create a CNAME record for the LoadBalancer DNS name, if so how do i do this ... not sure what this means?

    Read the article

  • Nginx load distribution and multi-domain SSL

    - by Steve Clark
    I'm researching into the best methods of two new parts of our infrastructure, hopefully finding a single solution for both. 1) We're currently running a single application server, and we're going to be adding an additional application server and load balance between the two. 2) We handle a few thousand domains across the application server(s), and we're looking to support SSL. The best method i've come across so far is using nginx for it's Load Distribution to serve the requests to the application servers, and for it's SSL support. If a request is using SSL, nginx accepts the request on, terminates SSL and pipes to apache (app servers). Now, that's all good, but i'm yet to figure out how we can let nginx handle multiple domains using SSL. We're potentially looking at using UCC SSL Certs, so we can support 150 domains on a single certificate, with each cert on a single IP. I'm all new to this (My experience is just with physical load balancers and a single domains on SSL), so any advice would be very much appreciated.

    Read the article

  • How can I force all requests to be SSL when using EC2 load balancer?

    - by chris
    I currently have a single EC2 instance which is forcing all requests to be secure by using mod_rewrite: RewriteEngine On RewriteCond %{SERVER_PORT} !443 RewriteRule ^(.*)$ https://%{HTTP_HOST}$1 [R,L] I am planning on moving to a load balanced setup, with multiple back-end instances. If I set up my EC2 load balancer with my certs, do I need to use SSL to communicate between the LB and my instances? If not, is it as simple as replacing the RewriteCond with RewriteCond %{HTTP:X-Forwarded_Proto} ^http$ Edit: I tried using the x-forwarded-proto, but it does not appear to work. Is there another way to detect if someone is connected to the LB via SSL?

    Read the article

  • Do HTTP reverse proxies typically enable HTTP Keep-Alive on the client side of the proxied connection and not on the server side?

    - by LostInComputer
    HAProxy has the ability to enable HTTP keep-alive on the client side (client <- HAProxy) but disable it on the server side (HAProxy <- server). Some of our clients connect to our web service via satellite so the latency is ~600ms and I think that by enabling keep-alive, it will speed things up a bit. Am I right? Is this supported by Nginx? Is this a widely implemented feature in other software and hardware load balancers? What else besides HAProxy?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64  | Next Page >