Re: high availability
| From: | Michael Kimsal | Date: | Tue, 07 Nov 2000 18:09:58 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: high availability | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 | Groups: | php.general |
| Request: | Send a blank email to php-general+get-24145@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Don't have experience with all of these issues, but....
Alex Verstraeten wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
> anyone ever applied the Linux Virtual Server (or any other similar)
> architecture on webservers running php applications?
> the Linux Virtual Server homepage, if anyone is interested, is
> http://www.LinuxVirtualServer.org
>
> I was wishing to implement something like that, but I'm not quite sure how
> can php fit there, the basic idea of this architecture is to have a load
> balancer box which handles connections (http/https in my case) from clients
> and passes them on the the real servers. Those real servers can share a
> distributed fault-tolerance filesystem like CODA. That way I can have a
> single copy of the php scripts that will be used by all servers, now, I'm
> wondering about the following issues:
>
> - Does php works fine over a CODA filesystem ?
>
> - will it be enough to just set the session.save_path on all servers to be
> stored at my CODA filesystem so all webservers can share sessions
> information or should I write a session class/function to store that info on
> a shared SQL backend instead?
>
I'd suggest putting things in a database. Not used coda directly,
but we tried a similar approach under NT writing info to shared drives,
and the performance wasn't as good as sharing info in a db.
CODA may be vastly different, but SQL makes more sense, imo.
>
> - what database do you think it will fit into this architecture? (something
> with mature load-balancing, high-availability features)
>
SQL7 may handle things better - last year I discovered that the
initial version didn't handle replication very well. If the link
between a master and slave was interrupted, BOTH master and slave
quit working. Upon learning that, plans were made to move things to
Oracle as they'd seen it work before doing load balancing and replication.
(I wasn't involved at that project after that point,
and don't know the final status).
>
> - do you know any better alternatives to this architecture?
>
> Any suggestions are very very welcome :))
>
>
How large of a system do you anticipate this being?
--
==========================
Michael Kimsal
http://www.tapinternet.com
734-480-9961