couple questions...

[Joseph Mack NA3T]

On Fri, 4 Aug 2006, Ricardo Kleemann wrote:

> I'm horrible with ascii art... :-(

No,no, it's beautiful (the bold lines, the striking 
constrast, the original two fold symmetry...)

> I guess we can look at it as a mini cluster with 4 
> servers. Servers A and B are application servers. Servers 
> X and Y are database servers.
>
>
>                   A
>               (LVS)
>                   |
>              --------
>              |      |
>              X ---- Y
>              |      |
>              --------
>                   |
>               (LVS)
>                   B
>
> X and Y are redundant, replicated database servers. Both A 
> and B would have their database connections load-balanced 
> between X and Y.
>
> So I was wondering if simply running LVS on BOTH server A 
> and B, in order to achieve the load balancing, is 
> feasible.
>
> In this case, the LVS is really directing local 
> connections (on A or B) to the X/Y servers. It is not 
> directing external connections from the internet.

OK. Now I don't know why you're doing it, even after 
re-reading your original post.

Do you understand that you can't load balance database 
servers (X,Y in your diagram), at least the ones like mysql, 
postgresql. If you don't, read the section on database 
servers in the HOWTO. You can have one be a failover backup 
for the other, but that's about it.

I don't see why you have two LVS directors. The logical flow 
of connections is no different to that with one director. 
It's like having two routers, instead of one in front of X. 
If you want A and B to be a failover pair then you need a 
common connection from them to the outside world.

Joe

-- 
Joseph Mack NA3T EME(B,D), FM05lw North Carolina
jmack (at) wm7d (dot) net - azimuthal equidistant map
generator at http://www.wm7d.net/azproj.shtml 
Homepage http://www.austintek.com/ It's GNU/Linux!