Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1999 19:00:50 -0700 From: "Russell L. Carter" <rcarter@pinyon.org> To: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Cc: freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Redundant Remote Webserver clustering Message-ID: <199906300200.TAA43626@psf.Pinyon.ORG> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 29 Jun 1999 20:37:04 -0400." <199906300037.UAA65916@cs.rpi.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
%> Define clustering. If you mean a bunch of boxes that serve up HTTP %> requests and the lot of them continue working in the face of a %> failure on one, you CAN do this with FreeBSD, and the "Beowulf" %> software you're probably thinking of for Linux WILL NOT do this. %I have looked into the "Beowulf" system alot recently. It is nothing but %a glorified COW design. And it uses "off the shelf" software components %that run under FreeBSD as well of better than linux often. I used to %thing it was a big deal. Not any more :I This is a tangent though :) That's exactly right, and has been true for about 4 years now. %> You do this on FreeBSD (or Linux or Solaris) by creating a "layer 4 %> router" or HTTP switch that directs traffic evenly among your several %> web servers, and stops sending traffic to servers that have failed. %Where could someone find information on setting this up, and what software %to use? I have someone who would be very interested in this. Isn't the %"layer 4 router" a SPoF though? I haven't actually installed one but my understanding, based on evaluating it as a competitor to some work that I am doing, is you just buy these off the shelf now. I don't have the vendor list handy at home. These things apparently are pretty good at looking inside of packets and making (fast) routing decisions based on the packet protocol and a set of site configured policies. The jargon thrown around my neck of the woods is "smart networks". They understand HTTP pretty darn well. Luckily, not IIOP, yet, which is when my interest faded. Oh yes, about that SPoF, they happily run redundantly, too, with the obvious performance optimizations for redundant channels, degrading as needed. Apparently, these things don't need proprietary extensions for their functionality so use of FreeBSD for the backend OS is unimpaired. I suspect Yahoo has a few... Anyway, maybe followup this to freebsd-isp? Not much -hackers stuff here. And if my assessment is inaccurate, I can find out quicker :-). Russell % %-- %David Cross | email: crossd@cs.rpi.edu %Systems Administrator/Research Programmer | Web: http://www.cs.rpi.edu/~crossd %Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, | Ph: 518.276.2860 %Department of Computer Science | Fax: 518.276.4033 %I speak only for myself. | WinNT:Linux::Linux:FreeBSD 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?199906300200.TAA43626>