Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 24 Apr 2002 09:21:25 -0400
From:      Bill Vermillion <bv@wjv.com>
To:        freebsd-isp@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: HTTP Load Balancing and Availability Solutions
Message-ID:  <20020424132125.GE85736@wjv.com>
In-Reply-To: <1019652482.38204.4.camel@xyzzy.intranet.snsonline.net>
References:  <3CC6A5D2.3070701@emre.de> <1019652482.38204.4.camel@xyzzy.intranet.snsonline.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 22:48 , while impersonating an expert on 
the internet, Mark Sergeant sent this to stdout:

> Depending on the nature of the project and the availability
> required I would only recommend a software based solution for a
> project that didn't have a requirement of more than 95% uptime,

95% UPTIME.  That is only 51 out of 52 weeks/year.  Even 99.999%
is 8 hours down time per year.  Five 9' is usually achievable with
just good hw/sw design.  My web server - though not heavily
stressed is a 498 days 16:44 as I type this.

> My recommendation would be should it absolutely have to be done with
> software then go with the mod_proxy and a 1 hour ttl for your www
> address (anything less than an hour is usually ignored), this way a
> replacement box can take over the proxying server inside of an hour
> should there be any issues.

Would it not make sense to monitor the target machine and if/when
it fails then just re-write the IP on the standby machine to
achieve a fail-over scenario.

Bill
-- 
Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv . com

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020424132125.GE85736>