Search Results

Search found 814 results on 33 pages for 'balancing'.

Page 6/33 | < Previous Page | 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13  | Next Page >

• Growing a small hosting company [closed]

  - by user2353007

  We currently have a few servers, 1 WHM VPS (2GB), 1 MS SQL VPS (2 GB), and 1 IIS VPS (2GB). The VPS servers are doing fine as far as uptime and response times but we would like to add the following features. 1) monitoring with load statistics 2) failover I have looked a Zabbix, Zenoss, Nagios, and a couple of other cloud solutions like monitor.us and watchdog from Zerigo. Ideally for the monitoring solution. Our current hosting company suggested we get a dedicated server or VPS and install load balancing software (not sure I like that idea). I've looked into Rackspace and Amazon load balancers which seem like the most feasible solutions for load balancers. Does anybody have any input on the monitoring and load balancing products I'm looking into? Monitoring should monitor uptime as well as give reports on memory usage, disk usage, processor usage, and which processes/websites/users are responsible for the load. It would be ideal if the load balancer worked with any IP. Not sure if either Rackspace or Amazon load balancers would allow load balancing with servers outside their datacenter. Thank you.

  Read the article

• How to use instances with s3 load balancing?

  - by Slay

  I have some questions about instances and load balancing in amazon s3. I can configured an instances in s3, but i do not understand how to deal with many instances in s3. Currently, my instance is loaded with mysql, php etc (ALL IN ONE). However how do i ensure my instances is scaling? E.g if i have a site that is suppose to be handled using 3 instances and using amazon rds. Do i need to host my code base in the 3 instances? how do people normally do this? like facebook has 1000+ servers. Do they host their code base in all the 1000+ servers? Thanks

  Read the article

• ISP Load Balancing with ISA 2006

  - by Bill Best

  I understand that ISA 2006 has an integrated Network Load Balancing feature. We also recently acquired a second internet line through a second service provider. I know it is possible to purchase a NLB router for using both incoming lines but this is not the route we would like to take if at all possible. Thus, is it possible to have two ISA 2006 servers each with there own external connection, Load balanced to be viewed as one gateway? My thought was to have two ISA servers each with three NICs, one external, one internal and one for cross communication. I am under the impression that this should work but was hoping someone else has had experience with it.

  Read the article

• Best way to split LAN computers on two WANs (not load balancing)

  - by lpfavreau

  What is the best way to split the computers of a LAN (about 50 computers) to go on two WANs, depending on the computers' IP address or computers' configuration (gateway). I'm not looking for load-balancing, I need to be able to route which computer uses which Internet connection. A solution would be to rewire the old office to split the two distinct groups that need to use two different Internet connections but I'm not sure it's worth it at the moment. I have a pfSense router configured with the LAN (DHCP), WAN1 and WAN2. I also have the IP addresses (and ability to configure) the next router on WAN1 and the one on WAN2. What would you suggest? Routing based on IP addresses ranges? Different gateways? VLANs would be difficult for the same reason as to why rewire is a bit complicated. Thanks!

  Read the article

• Looking for a router with multiple WAN ports and load balancing

  - by Cyrcle

  I'm going to be moving in a few months. The location I'm moving to is great except it's on a road with very few people, so the internet access option is limited to DSL at 1.6Mbps down, 384kbps up. This is much slower than I'm used to. One option is to get at least two of the DSL lines. There's also good possibility that I'll be able to get WiMax or similar. I've been looking around a bit and it seems like what I need is a load balancing router with multiple WAN ports. Can anyone recommend some good ones? I could also go with a small power efficient Linux box with multiple NICs. What would be good software for that? It'd need to be able to handle around 10Mbps. Thanks for any help

  Read the article

• Windows Load Balancing Services and File Shares

  - by cbkadel

  We are using Windows Load Balancing Services (WLBS). One of the things that I do notice, is that if I create a File Share on one of the physical hosts, I am able browse to that file share using the clustered-ip address. This might be a 'opinion' question, but I haven't been able to find much literature on file shares in particular with wlbs. Is this a recommendation configuration? Are there any limitations? What about when the share contains different sets of content on both hosts? For instance: Three 'hostnames' - host1 (physical1), host2 (physical2), and cluster. I create the following shares: \physical1\myshare \physical2\myshare What I notice is that i can see: \cluster\myshare I'm guessing that this is read-only, and that there's no file synchronization. But what happens if they are in fact out of sync, what would a network browser see then? Thanks for your time!

  Read the article

• Load Balancing and High Availability for Web Site

  - by nzgirl

  We've developing a database driven (70%/30% read/write load) website using C#.NET, IIS and MS SQL Server 2008 to be hosted on Windows 2008. Due to contractual reasons our setup has to be hosted on our own physical/virtual servers instead of a cloud solution at this stage. Could someone outline or link to some best practices that would provide both high availability (priority at the moment) and eventually load balancing for our site. We're probably looking at some sort of 2 SQL server mirrored system and 2 ISS web servers to start with. Thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• How to enable Integrated Load Balancing in Windows 8

  - by intodevelopment

  One of the cool new features many sites mention is "Integrated Load Balancing" in Windows 8. It is supposed to do the following: If you have multiple active network connections, Windows 8 will intelligently balance the network traffic between them for performance Source: Short: Some of what Microsoft didn’t show of Windows 8 I would love to see this feature in action. I am connected to a WiFi access point and to a different network by cable. Yet I don't see the operating system 'intelligently' balance the network load when for instance downloading multiple files. Is there any way to enable it or should I adjust my expectations?

  Read the article

• Throttle connections to web service if load gets too high?

  - by Joseph Turian

  I have a web site that communicates via XMLRPC with an XMLRPC server web service. (The web service is written in Python using xmlrpclib.) I believe that xmlrpclib will block while it is handling one request. So if there are three users with an xmlrpclib request ahead of you, your response takes four times as long. How do I handle it if I receive too many XMLRPC requests and the web service gets bogged down and has slow response time? If I am getting slashdotted, my preferred behavior is that the first users get good response times and everyone else is told to come back later. I think this is superior to giving everyone terrible response times. How do I create this behavior? Is this called load-balancing? I am not actually balancing though, until I have multiple servers.

  Read the article

• Network Load Balancing, intermittent port problem

  - by Jimmy Chandra

  Trying to troubleshoot an intermittent problem. I think it might be related to an NLB issue. We are using Windows Network Load Balancing to balance load for our multiserver SharePoint front ends. Say... Web Front End 1 IP is 192.168.1.100 and Web Front End 2 IP is 192.168.1.101, the NLB is setup to load balance both WFE servers on any incoming traffic to the IP 192.168.1.200. Sometimes we got an intermittent issue where when we try to access the SharePoint site using 192.168.1.200:8080 (say the site is set up to run on port 8080) from a remote client, it will display page not found. Pinging the 192.168.1.200 will give responses, but when trying to telnet to 192.168.1.200:8080 it just won't connect. However, browsing the SharePoint site directly on individual WFE (192.168.1.100 and 192.168.1.101) show no problem whatsoever. My guess also (we didn't get a chance to try it yet, but I think it should work), if I try connecting remotely to individual server, it will respond just fine. But any attempt on trying to connect using the virtual IP (192.168.1.200) will fail miserably. Funny thing is, after a while it will return back to normal. Anyone had similar experience with this type of problem while implementing NLB before? We are doing this in a virtual environment.

  Read the article

• haproxy - pass original / remote ip in tcp mode

  - by Vito Botta

  I've got haproxy set up with keepalived for load balancing and ip failover of a percona cluster, and since it works great I'd like to use the same lb / failover for another service/daemon. I've configured haproxy this way: listen my_service 0.0.0.0:4567 mode tcp balance leastconn option tcpka contimeout 500000 clitimeout 500000 srvtimeout 500000 server host1 xxx.xxx.xxx.xx1:4567 check port 4567 inter 5000 rise 3 fall 3 server host2 xxx.xxx.xxx.xx2:4567 check port 4567 inter 5000 rise 3 fall 3 The load balancing works fine, but the service sees the IP of the load balancer instead of the actual IPs of the clients. In http mode it's quite easy to have haproxy pass along the remote IP, but how do I do in tcp mode? This is critical due to the nature of the service I need to load balance. Thanks! Vito

  Read the article

• Network Load Balancing, intermittent port problem on Windows Server 2008

  - by Jimmy Chandra

  Trying to troubleshoot an intermittent problem on a Windows Server 2008 NLB. I think it might be related to an NLB issue. We are using Windows Network Load Balancing to balance load for our multiserver SharePoint front ends. Say... Web Front End 1 IP is 192.168.1.100 and Web Front End 2 IP is 192.168.1.101, the NLB is setup to load balance both WFE servers on any incoming traffic to the IP 192.168.1.200. Sometimes we got an intermittent issue where when we try to access the SharePoint site using 192.168.1.200:8080 (say the site is set up to run on port 8080) from a remote client, it will display page not found. Pinging the 192.168.1.200 will give responses, but when trying to telnet to 192.168.1.200:8080 it just won't connect. However, browsing the SharePoint site directly on individual WFE (192.168.1.100 and 192.168.1.101) show no problem whatsoever. My guess also (we didn't get a chance to try it yet, but I think it should work), if I try connecting remotely to individual server, it will respond just fine. But any attempt on trying to connect using the virtual IP (192.168.1.200) will fail miserably. Funny thing is, after a while it will return back to normal. Anyone had similar experience with this type of problem while implementing NLB before? We are doing this in a virtual environment.

  Read the article

• Working WCF WebServices with NLB server

  - by gguth

  Im starting the architecture of a new project using WCF, but im not the right person to make some network considerations, so im doing some research but cannot find the answers to these questions: We´ll host the WCF service in a common Windows Service app in 2 servers and we´ll have another server to make the Load-Balancing job using the WNLB. The fact that we are hosting the WCF in a Windows Service app can disturb the NLB job? Before my research i thought the load balancing was tought to configure, but with NLB it seems to be very simple, its really that simple? Note: The binding will be basicHttpBinding

  Read the article

• Service haproxy error

  - by user128296

  I want to configure Haproxy for outgoing mail load balancing. my configuration file /etc/haproxy.cfg is. global maxconn 4096 # Total Max Connections. This is dependent on ulimit daemon nbproc 4 # Number of processing cores. Dual Dual-core Opteron is 4 cores for example. defaults mode tcp listen smtp_proxy 199.83.95.71:25 mode tcp option tcplog balance roundrobin # Load Balancing algorithm ## Define your servers to balance server r23.lbsmtp.org 74.117.x.x:25 weight 1 maxconn 512 check server r15.lbsmtp.org 199.71.x.x:25 weight 1 maxconn 512 check And when i start service haproxy i get this error. Starting HAproxy: [ALERT] 244/172148 (7354) : cannot bind socket for proxy smtp_proxy. Aborting. Please tell me where i am doing mistake.help will appreciated.

  Read the article

• Squid on windows loadbalancing only to one server

  - by Martin L.

  After thousands of googles and trying days i cant get the load balancer/failover in squid on windows to work. Iam using squid 2.7. My webservers are 2 single NIC lighttpd and one dual nic lighttpd. server1 in this example is running squid on port 80 and lighttpd on port 8080 (just to test) Requirements: All 3 webservers running lighttpd should be balanced two option for load balancing: Best would be if server1 is busy server2 takes over, if server2 is busy server3 takes over, etc.. Round robin style evenly distributed load. Eg server1 takes first call, server2 second etc.. All requests should be treated the same way (no url rewriting or so on) Sent host headers have to be redirected to every server as http host header, speaking of "server1", "server1.company.internal" and "10.211.1.1". My approach: acl all src all acl manager proto cache_object http_port 80 accel defaultsite=server1.company.internal vhost #reverse proxy entries cache_peer 10.211.2.1 parent 8080 0 no-query originserver round-robin login=PASS name=server1_nic1 cache_peer 10.211.1.2 parent 80 0 no-query originserver round-robin login=PASS name=server2_nic1 cache_peer 10.211.2.3 parent 8080 0 no-query originserver round-robin login=PASS name=server3_nic1 cache_peer 10.211.2.4 parent 8080 0 no-query originserver round-robin login=PASS name=server3_nic2 #decl of names of squid host acl registered_name_hostdomain dstdomain server1.company.internal acl registered_name_host dstdomain server1 #ip of squid host acl registered_name_ip dstdomain 10.211.2.1 # access: redirects the correct squid hostname http_access allow registered_name_hostdomain http_access allow registered_name_host http_access allow registered_name_ip http_access deny all cache_peer_access server1_nic1 allow registered_name_hostdomain cache_peer_access server1_nic1 allow registered_name_host cache_peer_access server1_nic1 allow registered_name_ip cache_peer_access server2_nic1 allow registered_name_hostdomain cache_peer_access server2_nic1 allow registered_name_host cache_peer_access server2_nic1 allow registered_name_ip cache_peer_access server3_nic1 allow registered_name_hostdomain cache_peer_access server3_nic1 allow registered_name_host cache_peer_access server3_nic1 allow registered_name_ip cache_peer_access server3_nic2 allow registered_name_hostdomain cache_peer_access server3_nic2 allow registered_name_host cache_peer_access server3_nic2 allow registered_name_ip cache_peer_access server1_nic1 deny all cache_peer_access server2_nic1 deny all cache_peer_access server3_nic1 deny all cache_peer_access server3_nic2 deny all never_direct allow all Problems: Load balancer does not load balance other than to first server. Only if the first server is killed in any way the second will take over. I have seen the others working at some point, but definitely not as the intended load balancing described above. If the cache_peer_access is not defined sometimes the wrong hostname is sent to the backend webserver and this always depends on the defaultsite= parameter. Probably because the host header on the request to squid is not set and its replaced by defaultsite. Leaving out defaultsite didnt solve the problem. The only workaround i found for this is the current approach with cache_peer_access. Questions: Does the cache_peer_access influence the round-robin? Is there a better workaround to pass the host header to the backed webservers? Which parameters do increase the speed of load balancing or does anyone have a better approach? -Martin

  Read the article

• Clustering with Vsphere and Apache load balacing

  - by Anonymous2011

  I was looking at Vsphere to automatically load balance my apache web servers, and mysql servers but will this actually do the job? I know it says it does auto load balancing but not actually sure it quite means what I want to achieve. Is there an easier way to set up a php-apache and mysql cluster within virtual machines? Or are there any guides to clustering? (I have tried googling without much luck) Any help towards understanding/setting up clustering and load balancing within virtual machines appreciated.

  Read the article

• geographical deployment Vs geo load balancing SharePoint 2010

  - by vrajaraman

  we have a company wide SharePoint portals planned for few thousand users. since the users are distributed among different countries and their applications (hosted in sharepoint) We would like to consider geo deployment Vs geo load balancing. Please share your inputs. We are aware of this, Geo SharePoint Cluster facilitates - Farms at Central and other sites , db into regional. 2 db cluster - syncing using logshipping or SAN sync or SQL 2008 features like database mirroing Vs Loading balancing using URL and some 3rd party. all farm,sites,db centralised. benefits expecting. 1 High availability. 2.diaster recovering management. 3.maintenance hope i miss some of the points to be covered

  Read the article

• PF, load balanced gateways, and Squid

  - by Santa

  Hi, So I have a FreeBSD router running PF and Squid, and it has three network interfaces: two connected to upstream providers (em0 and em1 respectively), and one for LAN (re0) that we serve. There is some load balancing configured with PF. Basically, it routes all traffic to ports 1-1024 through one interface (em0) and everything else through the other (em1). Now, I have a Squid proxy also running on the box that transparently redirects any HTTP request from LAN to port 3128 in 127.0.0.1. Since Squid redirects this request to HTTP outside, it should follow the load balancing rule through em0, no? The problem is, when we tested it out (by browsing from a computer in the LAN to http://whatismyip.com, it reports the external IP of the em1 interface! When we turn Squid off, the external IP of em0 is reported, as expected. How do I make Squid behave with the load balancing rule that we have set up? Here's the related settings in /etc/pf.conf that I have: ext_if1="em1" # DSL ext_if2="em0" # T1 int_if="re0" ext_gw1="x.x.x.1" ext_gw2="y.y.y.1" int_addr="10.0.0.1" int_net="10.0.0.0/16" dsl_ports = "1024:65535" t1_ports = "1:1023" ... squid=3128 rdr on $int_if inet proto tcp from $int_net \ to any port 80 -> 127.0.0.1 port $squid pass in quick on $int_if route-to lo0 inet proto tcp \ from $int_net to 127.0.0.1 port $squid keep state ... # load balancing pass in on $int_if route-to ($ext_if1 $ext_gw1) \ proto tcp from $int_net to any port $dsl_ports keep state pass in on $int_if route-to ($ext_if1 $ext_gw1) \ proto udp from $int_net to any port $dsl_ports pass in on $int_if route-to ($ext_if2 $ext_gw2) \ proto tcp from $int_net to any port $t1_ports keep state pass in on $int_if route-to ($ext_if2 $ext_gw2) \ proto udp from $int_net to any port $t1_ports Thanks!

  Read the article

• Unexpected behaviour when dynamically add node in HAproxy server

  - by Anand Soni

  I wanted to use HAProxy for my web app for load balancing purpose. I am trying to add a new rabbitmq node dynamically in HAProxy server using command : haproxy -p /var/run/haproxy.pid -sf $(cat /var/run/haproxy.pid). I am doing tcp connection mode with leastconn balance algorithm in load balancing. What is expected is when there is 3 connection in one rabbitmq, I add a new rabbit server in HAProxy server. so the next connection would pass to 2nd rabbitmq server which is not happening in my case. It distributes the connection in haphazardly manner. Here is my config file: defaults log global mode http option httplog option dontlognull retries 3 option redispatch maxconn 2000 contimeout 5000 clitimeout 5000 srvtimeout 5000 listen rabbitmq 0.0.0.0:5672 mode tcp stats enable balance leastconn option tcplog server rabbit01 xx.xx.xx.xx:5672 check server rabbit02 xx.xx.xx.xx:5672 check listen tomcatq 0.0.0.0:80 mode http stats enable balance roundrobin stats refresh 10s stats refresh 10s stats uri /lb?stats stats auth admin:admin option httplog What is the problem causing this behavior? Any suggestion will appreciated.

  Read the article

• Setting up multiple servers for one domain

  - by Joseph Torraca

  So I am starting up a new website and I was wondering how to set up 5 servers to host the site. I have already purchased 5 Apple XServes, one will be used as a test server and the other 4 will be for the live site. So I have read some website on the internet and they all reference using one server and installing software onto it and have that server do the load balancing. I have also read that you could use a hardware, rack-mounted system and plug the servers into that. The load balancer would then distribute the load. So I have a few questions about each: 1) How do you set up the software version and have the other servers as "slaves" and have one "master" to direct traffic? 2) Which of the two options above are more reliable, and better suited for a startup that doesn't have many users per month, yet(hopefully)? 3) Is there a theoretical max limit of servers that can be connected to a software load balancing system? Note: Obviously this will change from software to software, but in terms of the server being able to handle it? 4) In your own opinion, what are you using for your sites? Have you had any problems setting up that system or operating it once its running? Are there any things you would stay away from if you had to start over? 5) I also purchased a Apple RAID system, so if you are familiar with it, is there any way to connect it to multiple Xserves so they all serve the same data? I'm a little confused on this, so thanks for all your help and being patient with me. Note: Take it easy on me, I am learning this as I go along, so I may have used terms incorrectly or explained things that don't really make sense. Sorry. P.S. If you need me to supply the specs on the servers to determine which system makes the most sense, I can post them for you.

  Read the article

• HA Proxy won't load balance my web requests. What have I done wrong?

  - by Josh Smeaton

  I've finally got HA Proxy set up and running in a way I think I want. However, it is not load balancing the web requests it receives. All requests are currently being forwarded to the first server in the cluster. I'm going to paste my configuration below - if anyone can see where I may have gone wrong, I'd appreciate it. This is my first stab at configuring web servers in a *nix environment. First up, I have HA Proxy running on the same host as the first server in the apache cluster. We are moving these servers to virtual later on, and they will have different virtual hosts, but I wanted to get this running now. Both web servers are receiving their health checks, and are reporting back correctly. The haproxy?stats page correctly reports servers that are up and down. I've tested this by altering the name of the file that is checked. I haven't put any load onto these servers yet. I've just opened up the URLs on several tabs (private browsing), and had several co-workers hit the URL too. All of the traffic goes to WEB1. Am I balancing incorrectly? global maxconn 10000 nbproc 8 pidfile /var/run/haproxy.pid log 127.0.0.1 local0 debug daemon defaults log global mode http retries 3 option redispatch maxconn 5000 contimeout 5000 clitimeout 50000 srvtimeout 50000 listen WEBHAEXT :80,:8443 mode http cookie sessionbalance insert indirect nocache balance roundrobin option httpclose option forwardfor except 127.0.0.1 option httpchk HEAD health_check.txt stats enable stats auth rah:rah server WEB1 10.90.2.131:81 cookie WEB_1 check server WEB2 10.90.2.130:80 cookie WEB_2 check

  Read the article

• Load Sharing Regarding Large Websites

  - by JHarley1

  Hello, I have a question regarding Load Sharing for large websites. My Understanding: So if you have a website that has millions of fits a day you will need to have an architecture that can support this sort of pressure. You can either do one or two things: Invest in a single large server that has huge amounts of processing power, memory and storage (such as Microsoft's TerraServer). Spread the load of your website across a number of machines. Let me tackle the second approach, so you have a collection of machines all running Web Server Software and all having access to identical copies of the websites pages. You can either spread the load across these machines using a cyclic pattern in a DNS or you can use a Load Ballancing Switch. The advantages of this approach is: - Redundancy - servers can fail and the others would "pick up the slack" - Incremental - the ability to easily add new machines to this set-up. My Question's Is there a Virtual approach to this issue of load balancing now? If the website runs from a database - is there still only a single copy of the database? If a user had a session running on one Server (e.g. they had gone to www.example.org and had been assigned to Server 2 - were they had created a session) if they refreshed the website (and were allocated Server 3) would they still have their session? What are the other disadvantages associated with Load Balancing? Many Thanks, J

  Read the article

• HAproxy with MySQL Master-Master Replication incredibly slow

  - by Yayap

  I have two MySQL servers in multi-master mode, with an HAproxy machine for simple load balancing/redundancy. When I am connected to one of the servers directly and try to update about 100,000 entries, it is completed including replication in about half a minute. When connecting through the proxy it takes usually over three whole minutes. Is it normal to have that type of latency? Is something amiss with my proxy configuration (included below)? This is getting really frustrating as I assumed the proxy would do some sort of load balancing, or at least have little to no overhead. #--------------------------------------------------------------------- # Example configuration for a possible web application. See the # full configuration options online. # # http://haproxy.1wt.eu/download/1.4/doc/configuration.txt # #--------------------------------------------------------------------- #--------------------------------------------------------------------- # Global settings #--------------------------------------------------------------------- global # to have these messages end up in /var/log/haproxy.log you will # need to: # # 1) configure syslog to accept network log events. This is done # by adding the '-r' option to the SYSLOGD_OPTIONS in # /etc/sysconfig/syslog # # 2) configure local2 events to go to the /var/log/haproxy.log # file. A line like the following can be added to # /etc/sysconfig/syslog # # local2.* /var/log/haproxy.log # log 127.0.0.1 local2 # chroot /var/lib/haproxy # pidfile /var/run/haproxy.pid maxconn 4096 user haproxy group haproxy daemon #debug #quiet # turn on stats unix socket stats socket /var/lib/haproxy/stats #--------------------------------------------------------------------- # common defaults that all the 'listen' and 'backend' sections will # use if not designated in their block #--------------------------------------------------------------------- defaults mode tcp log global #option tcplog option dontlognull option tcp-smart-accept option tcp-smart-connect #option http-server-close #option forwardfor except 127.0.0.0/8 #option redispatch retries 3 #timeout http-request 10s #timeout queue 1m timeout connect 400 timeout client 500 timeout server 300 #timeout http-keep-alive 10s #timeout check 10s maxconn 2000 listen mysql-cluster 0.0.0.0:3306 mode tcp balance roundrobin option tcpka option httpchk server db01 192.168.15.118:3306 weight 1 inter 1s rise 1 fall 1 server db02 192.168.15.119:3306 weight 1 inter 1s rise 1 fall 1

  Read the article

• Designing a software based load balancer

  - by Kishore pandey

  Hello to all Server fault users, I am new to this website but have constantly been using the mother website, stackover flow. Well to begin with, i would like to design a load balancer for the organization i am working for. As i am very new to this whole, idea about load balancing and networks. I am finding it very difficult to start my project. I did a lot of research on already existing load balancer and found some(HAPROXY,NGINX) that could solve my problems, but the point is, I am still in a dilemma if they could answer the following requirements of mine: The client and server in my architecture are distributed. The load balancer should take care of the firewall. LB server should balance the load among all servers present in WWW cloud. The LB server should have some sort of configuration file, with the help of which it is possible to configure the servers. Heart beat: With the help of which it would be possible to check if any server is down, if any server is down the request should be passed to some other server. Various load balancing algorithms of the incoming requests. Easy error handling. It should be fairly possible to prioritize the incoming requests. Is there any already available load balncer solution on the market that could satisfy these requirements? If not is there any base code available with the help of which i could develop my own load balncer. If not where should i start from scratch? I am practically new to everything. Any help from a load balancer expert is very much appreciated. Thanx a ton in advance. Cheers and regards. Kishore

  Read the article

• What's the best way to run Drupal and Django sites behind the same Varnish server?

  - by Alexis Bellido

  I have a high traffic website running with Drupal and Apache, five web servers behind a Varnish server load balancing. Let's say this site is example.com. I'm using five backends and a director like this in my default.vcl: director balancer round-robin { { .backend = web1; } { .backend = web2; } { .backend = web3; } { .backend = web4; } { .backend = web5; } } Now I'm working on a new Django project that will be a new section of this site running on example.com/new-section. After checking the documentation I found I can do something like this: sub vcl_recv { if (req.url ~ "^/new-section/") { set req.backend = newbackend; } else { set req.backend = default; } } That is, using a different backend for a subdirectory /new-section under the same domain. My question is, how do I make something like this work with my director and load balancing setup? I'm probably going to run two or more web servers (backends) with my new Django project, each one with a mix of Gunicorn, Nginx, and a few Python packages, and would like to put all of those in their own Varnish director to load balance. Is it possible to do use the above approach to decide which director to use?, like this: sub vcl_recv { if (req.url ~ "^/new-section/") { set req.director = newdirector; } else { set req.director = balancer; } } All suggestions welcome. Thanks!

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13  | Next Page >