LVS behaviour with no realservers available

[Arthur Kao]

ldirectord has a "fallback" directive. We use that to serve up a
"service unavailable due to maintenance" message.

Arthur

On 9/15/06, Nicholas Newberry <nnewberry at espial.com> wrote:
>
> > > The point of all of this is that if the realservers aren't
> > > up, I want client requests to time out (i.e. be silently
> > > dropped by the director) rather than get "connection
> > > refused".
> >
> > the user on the client box may not like this (for http, the
> > web browser will just hang). Just a caution - you usually
> > only drop packets for connections that you regard as
> > malicious, and give normal users the reject so they can do
> > something else.
> I agree that in the vast majority of cases, the LVS behaviour is what it
> should be - we're definitely working with a special case. :)
>
> > However if you really want it, a possible way might be to
> > have a director with localnode and an iptables rule for
> > 127.0.0.1:your_service to drop the inbound packets.
> Thanks! Localnode looks like it might be what I'm looking for, as long
> as I can ensure that the local node would only be chosen as a realserver
> when no other realserver is available. I think I've seen an option like
> this kicking around...
>
> > Another way of handling it would be to have a localnode
> > sorry server (displaying a page saying "our website is down
> > - please come back")
> Since our cluster is providing HTTP services, our plan is to eventually
> respond with a HTTP "Temporarily Unavailable", but atm the clients do
> not support it. But now we know how to do it when the time comes. :)
>
> Thanks for the reply, and the HOWTOs!
>
> Nick.
> _______________________________________________
> LinuxVirtualServer.org mailing list - lvs-users at LinuxVirtualServer.org
> Send requests to lvs-users-request at LinuxVirtualServer.org
> or go to http://www.in-addr.de/mailman/listinfo/lvs-users
>


-- 
Arthur Kao
http://arthurkao.com