> We are starting a new project, and are trying to decide the best way to > proceed. We want to setup a LAMP configuration using Centos, something > we have been doing in the past with great success. > > The question is load balancing. We antisipate the potential for the > system to receive 500,000 requests/ day with in the next year. We want > to plan for that extra load now as we start the project. What would you > suggest for setups for multiple servers for redundancy and load balancing? > > I have setup MySQL replication and that works fine but what about the > rest of the system. I know it is quite simple to setup with windows > 2003 server. > > Would a cluster be the way to go? Ideally we would like 2-? severs > setup that are all identical and sharing the load as need be, and if one > fails users would notice nothing. > > I have also thought of just looking for a hosting company that offers > load balancing servers and not worry about it but we like to have control. > > Thanks for any suggestionspersonally is you want a commercial system i would go for Zeus as it installs onto commodity x86 hardware or if you want open source then the Linux LVS project is a good bet thanks
Hi, Mace Eliason schrieb:> The question is load balancing. We antisipate the potential for the > system to receive 500,000 requests/ day with in the next year. We want > to plan for that extra load now as we start the project. What would you > suggest for setups for multiple servers for redundancy and load balancing?For a customer of ours we're managing a dedicated cluster with about 10.000.000 Hits/Day hitting the webservers (currently 5 running CentOS/LAMP). Loadbalancing is done by a set of reverse squid's acting as caches for static content also (round about 70% of all hits are handled by squid without bothering the webservers). We're quite happy with this setup at the moment. By now Database-Load is handled by only one DB-Server (with manual failover).> [...] > I have also thought of just looking for a hosting company that offers > load balancing servers and not worry about it but we like to have control.In my opinion this is only a matter of negotiation with your hosting company - but sure this is dependent on how much control you want to have ;-) -- Greetings from "good old germany" Michael Metz **************************************************** SpeedPartner GmbH Neukirchener Str. 57, 41470 Neuss Tel.: 02137 / 91666-2, Fax: 02137 / 91666-1 E-Mail: info at speedpartner.de ****************************************************
Hi, We are starting a new project, and are trying to decide the best way to proceed. We want to setup a LAMP configuration using Centos, something we have been doing in the past with great success. The question is load balancing. We antisipate the potential for the system to receive 500,000 requests/ day with in the next year. We want to plan for that extra load now as we start the project. What would you suggest for setups for multiple servers for redundancy and load balancing? I have setup MySQL replication and that works fine but what about the rest of the system. I know it is quite simple to setup with windows 2003 server. Would a cluster be the way to go? Ideally we would like 2-? severs setup that are all identical and sharing the load as need be, and if one fails users would notice nothing. I have also thought of just looking for a hosting company that offers load balancing servers and not worry about it but we like to have control. Thanks for any suggestions Mace
Mace Eliason wrote:> Hi, > > We are starting a new project, and are trying to decide the best way > to proceed. We want to setup a LAMP configuration using Centos, > something we have been doing in the past with great success. > > The question is load balancing. We antisipate the potential for the > system to receive 500,000 requests/ day with in the next year. We > want to plan for that extra load now as we start the project. What > would you suggest for setups for multiple servers for redundancy and > load balancing? > > I have setup MySQL replication and that works fine but what about the > rest of the system. I know it is quite simple to setup with windows > 2003 server. > > Would a cluster be the way to go? Ideally we would like 2-? severs > setup that are all identical and sharing the load as need be, and if > one fails users would notice nothing. > > I have also thought of just looking for a hosting company that offers > load balancing servers and not worry about it but we like to have > control. > > Thanks for any suggestionsPerhaps this will help get you started: http://www.howtoforge.com/high_availability_loadbalanced_apache_cluster Cheers,
Mace Eliason wrote:> Hi, > > We are starting a new project, and are trying to decide the best way > to proceed. We want to setup a LAMP configuration using Centos, > something we have been doing in the past with great success. > > The question is load balancing. We antisipate the potential for the > system to receive 500,000 requests/ day with in the next year. We > want to plan for that extra load now as we start the project. What > would you suggest for setups for multiple servers for redundancy and > load balancing? > > I have setup MySQL replication and that works fine but what about the > rest of the system. I know it is quite simple to setup with windows > 2003 server. > > Would a cluster be the way to go? Ideally we would like 2-? severs > setup that are all identical and sharing the load as need be, and if > one fails users would notice nothing. > > I have also thought of just looking for a hosting company that offers > load balancing servers and not worry about it but we like to have > control. > > Thanks for any suggestionsAnd what seems to be an inexpensive commercially supported solution: http://www.interworx.com/products/iworx-cp/ I also remember there being a few other cluster solutions that used CentOS which is how I initially stumbled on its existence. Cheers,
On Tue, 23 May 2006 08:52:06 -0700 Mace Eliason <meliason at shaw.ca> wrote:> Hi, > > We are starting a new project, and are trying to decide the best way to > proceed. We want to setup a LAMP configuration using Centos, something > we have been doing in the past with great success.For LAMP setups I suggest mod_backhand - it evenly redistributes your requests among as many web servers you provide it. It works really great and I use it for a large webmail (~million hits daily). http://www.backhand.org/mod_backhand/ -- Jure Pe?ar http://jure.pecar.org/
Fabian Arrotin wrote:> On Tue, 2006-05-23 at 12:49 -0700, Dan Trainor wrote: > > > > > > > For the backend storage, it depends what's your budget ... :o) > > > A minimal setup is to use nfs on a central server to host/share > > > the same data across all your machines ... the problem in this > > > config is that the nfs server becomes the single point of failure > > > ... so why not using a simple heartbeat solution for 2 nfs > > > servers acting as one and uses drdb between these 2 nodes for the > > > replication ... > > > Other method is to have a dedicate san with hba in each > > > webservers but that's another budget ... :o) > > > > > > Just my two cents ... > > > > > > > > > > > HI, Fabian - > > > > I've been toying aroudn with both NFS and GFS, but NFS does leave me > > with a single point of failure. I'd rather not use something like > > drdb, however. I'm still researching GFS to see if it's a viable > > alternative for what I'm looking for. > > > > Thanks! > > -dant > > GFS can do the job, but in this case you should have a real shared > storage to permit all the servers to access the shared data in the > same time ... > If you don't want to invest a lot, you can still use iscsi but the > single point of failure still exists ...It tends to be expensive to do away with all points of failure. The best you can do on a budget is try to limit your points of failure to things that tend to have a long lifespan (i.e. almost anything other than servers and individual hard drives). For another (relatively) low-cost option, check out the AoE storage appliances from Coraid.com. Mine is still in testing, but it was very easy to configure with CentOS4 and I haven't found any problems with it so far. I currently have a 1.2TB storage area shared between three CentOS servers with GFS. -- Bowie
Hi there, I'm currently involved in a Project that requires high-avaiability and load-balancing for web servers and database servers. In order to have a load-balancing webserver, I use LVS and I use dns round robin. Basically I have the hostname with 2 distinct IP, so I have some load-balancing right from the start, using DNS. Then I have 2 machines (low-end) , that run LVS, and this machines are high-avaiable , using heart-beat. As to storage , I have the machines using an iscsi share , shared by a machine running with a raid 1+0. Regarding the database servers, i use Oracle so perhaps this is off-topic for you :) Best wishes, Bruno Sousa -----Mensagem original----- De: centos-bounces at centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces at centos.org] Em nome de Mace Eliason Enviada: ter?a-feira, 23 de Maio de 2006 16:52 Para: CentOS mailing list Assunto: [CentOS] Load Balancing Hi, We are starting a new project, and are trying to decide the best way to proceed. We want to setup a LAMP configuration using Centos, something we have been doing in the past with great success. The question is load balancing. We antisipate the potential for the system to receive 500,000 requests/ day with in the next year. We want to plan for that extra load now as we start the project. What would you suggest for setups for multiple servers for redundancy and load balancing? I have setup MySQL replication and that works fine but what about the rest of the system. I know it is quite simple to setup with windows 2003 server. Would a cluster be the way to go? Ideally we would like 2-? severs setup that are all identical and sharing the load as need be, and if one fails users would notice nothing. I have also thought of just looking for a hosting company that offers load balancing servers and not worry about it but we like to have control. Thanks for any suggestions Mace _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS at centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.392 / Virus Database: 268.7.0/345 - Release Date: 22-05-2006