Re: newbie question

From: Michiel van Es <mve#pcintelligence.nl>
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 00:08:28 +0200

On 4/20/10 11:45 PM, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 11:31:02PM +0200, Michiel van Es wrote:
>>>> listen load_balanced :80
>>>> mode http
>>>> option httpclose
>>>> balance roundrobin# Load Balancing algorithm
>>>> option forwardfor # This sets X-Forwarded-For
>>>> server server1 194.145.200.17
>>>> server server2 194.145.200.171
>>>
>>> none of your servers are checked (neither here nor in any other section).
>>> You should add "check" on each "server" line for that.
>>
>> Shall I enable check on every server entry for every 'service' entry?
>
> If you think that any of your service may individually fail, yes you
> should. For instance, the SMTP service might die without the HTTP service
> being affected. However, if some services are provided by a same daemon
> which cannot "half-fail" (eg: pop/imap), then you can enable server
> tracking. The principle is that only one of the service does the checks,
> and the other one says "track xxx/yyy" instead of "check", where "xxx"
> is the other instance name (the "listen" section in your case) and
> "yyy" the server name. That way, the tracking server will always be
> in the same state as the tracked server, and both will be up or down
> simultaneously.

I like the check method, so you think my posted 2nd config looks better?

Michiel

>
> Willy
>
Received on 2010/04/21 00:08

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : 2010/04/21 00:15 CEST