Quoting Aleksandar Lazic <al-haproxy#none.at>:
> Hi,
>
> On Die 03.06.2008 11:57, eneal#businessgrade.com wrote:
>> Quoting Alberto Giménez <lagimenez#gmail.com>:
>>
>>> Furthermore, you need the servers for transparent proxying to work to
>>> GET ROUTED THROUGH the load balancer, so it's not at all as direct
>>> routing on LVS.
>>
>> Yeah - This is not what I want to do. I want the real servers to
>> respond to the clients directly - as in what I can do with direct
>> routing and ipvs
>
> This is not possible with haproxy, maybe with some network quirks.
>
> Is it possibel to make the haproxy maschine more powerfull for the
> traffic?
Yes. I'm looking for suggestions on linux distro, kernel, everything.
Haproxy is new to me so I'm still digging into this aspect of it.
Right now, I'm running keepalived on a pair of CentOS 4 boxes with
PIII procs and it's worked for my needs up until this point. I do have
the option of migrating to new server platform.
> What is your bottleneck?
Definitely my PIII boxes
>
> Aleks
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. This communication may contain material protected by the attorney-client privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, be advised that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please contact the sender and delete all copies. Received on 2008/06/04 00:46
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : 2008/06/04 01:00 CEST