Welcome! Log In Create A New Profile

Advanced

Re: Viability of nginx instead of hardware load balancer?

Gabriel Ramuglia
September 24, 2009 11:56AM
My experiences with spread were less than stellar, but instead of
going into that, I'll just give a piece of advice. Spread first tries
to communicate using multicast, and then falls back to broadcasting.
At my hosting provider, since their equipment didn't support
multicast, this meant that, even though communications were only going
between two computers and did not need to be broadcast to everyone,
all communications were being broadcast to everyone on the subnet. It
didn't take long before my hosting provider null routed my server. You
can override this behaviour by telling spread to communicate using
unicast, but this only works if there is only one destination for each
source piece of information.

Just something to keep in mind
-Gabe

On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 4:04 PM, Barry Abrahamson <barry@automattic.com> wrote:
>
> On Sep 17, 2009, at 5:49 AM, John Moore wrote:
>
>> It certainly does, thanks! Could I trouble you to explain a little more
>> about your use of Wackamole and Spread? I've not used either of them before.
>
> There is a How-to here:
>
> http://www.howtoforge.com/setting-up-a-high-availability-load-balancer-with-haproxy-wackamole-spread-on-debian-etch-p2
>
> You are just using nginx instead of HAProxy, but the Wackamole and Spread
> portion still applies.
>
> Scalable Internet Architectures (
> http://www.amazon.com/Scalable-Internet-Architectures-Theo-Schlossnagle/dp/067232699X )
> also has a section on how this works.
>
>> Also, is there any reason why a hosting company would have problems with
>> such a setup (i.e., this won't be running in our hardware on our premises,
>> but we have full control of Linux servers).
>
> Yes, you have to be a little careful here and ask questions up front.  A lot
> of hosting companies segment their switches such that each port is it's own
> VLAN which means you can't "float" IPs between ports which is what you need
> for this to work.  If you tell your hosting company what you are trying to
> do and tell them that you need to be able to have IPs which are
> programmatically moved between switch ports they should be able to tell you
> if this is possible or not.  Some hosts may require you have some sort of
> "private rack" or other upgrade to make this possible.
>
> Barry
>
> --
> Barry Abrahamson | Systems Wrangler | Automattic
> Blog: http://barry.wordpress.com
>
>
>
>
>
Subject Author Posted

Viability of nginx instead of hardware load balancer?

John Moore September 15, 2009 10:50AM

RE: Viability of nginx instead of hardware load balancer?

David Murphy September 15, 2009 11:30AM

Re: Viability of nginx instead of hardware load balancer?

John Moore September 15, 2009 03:26PM

RE: Viability of nginx instead of hardware load balancer?

David Murphy September 15, 2009 04:08PM

Re: Viability of nginx instead of hardware load balancer?

Gena Makhomed September 15, 2009 04:28PM

Re: Viability of nginx instead of hardware load balancer?

iberkner September 15, 2009 04:52PM

RE: Viability of nginx instead of hardware load balancer?

David Murphy September 15, 2009 05:32PM

RE: Viability of nginx instead of hardware load balancer?

David Murphy September 15, 2009 05:20PM

Re: Viability of nginx instead of hardware load balancer?

Gena Makhomed September 16, 2009 04:16AM

RE: Viability of nginx instead of hardware load balancer?

David Murphy September 16, 2009 10:10AM

Re: Viability of nginx instead of hardware load balancer?

Gena Makhomed September 16, 2009 04:40PM

RE: Viability of nginx instead of hardware load balancer?

David Murphy September 17, 2009 10:12AM

Re: Viability of nginx instead of hardware load balancer?

Gena Makhomed September 21, 2009 06:58AM

RE: Viability of nginx instead of hardware load balancer?

David Murphy September 21, 2009 04:06PM

Re: Viability of nginx instead of hardware load balancer?

John Moore September 21, 2009 04:34PM

RE: Viability of nginx instead of hardware load balancer?

David Murphy September 21, 2009 05:16PM

Re: Viability of nginx instead of hardware load balancer?

Gena Makhomed September 23, 2009 01:30PM

Re: Viability of nginx instead of hardware load balancer?

Mirosław Jaworski September 15, 2009 05:32PM

Re: Viability of nginx instead of hardware load balancer?

Barry Abrahamson September 17, 2009 01:12AM

Re: Viability of nginx instead of hardware load balancer?

John Moore September 17, 2009 06:58AM

RE: Viability of nginx instead of hardware load balancer?

David Murphy September 17, 2009 10:14AM

Re: Viability of nginx instead of hardware load balancer?

Barry Abrahamson September 24, 2009 11:10AM

Re: Viability of nginx instead of hardware load balancer?

Gabriel Ramuglia September 24, 2009 11:56AM

Re: Viability of nginx instead of hardware load balancer?

Payam Chychi September 24, 2009 01:12PM

Re: Viability of nginx instead of hardware load balancer?

Gabriel Ramuglia September 24, 2009 01:36PM

RE: Viability of nginx instead of hardware load balancer?

David Murphy September 24, 2009 04:02PM

Re: Viability of nginx instead of hardware load balancer?

anomalizer October 03, 2009 03:20AM



Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login

Online Users

Guests: 220
Record Number of Users: 8 on April 13, 2023
Record Number of Guests: 421 on December 02, 2018
Powered by nginx      Powered by FreeBSD      PHP Powered      Powered by MariaDB      ipv6 ready