From peterbaitz at yahoo.com Fri Mar 12 19:16:07 2004 From: peterbaitz at yahoo.com (pb) Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 11:16:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: LVS Failover, Failback behavior In-Reply-To: <001c01c4084a$3687d450$cf01a8c0@apmsafe.com> Message-ID: <20040312191607.10396.qmail@web60001.mail.yahoo.com> Hello all, We were previously running Red Hat Linux 7.3 Piranha 0.7.0-3 Ipvsadm 1.21-4 Cost: Free :) Support: Self And now are running Red Hat Enterprise Linux AS v3 Piranha 0.7.6-1 Ipvsadm 1.21-9.ipvs108 Cost: Not Free :( Support: EDU Pricing - no phone support Fulll Price - Full Support Question: What is the failover / failback behavior of LVS supposed to be? In the olden days with the free version (above) it appears whenever the PRIMARY/BACKUP get disconnected due to network goes down and back again, they auto-negotiate via PULSE daemon, and the BACKUP kills its LVS daemons and routing table so the PRIMARY is the only one routing. But how about if we fail the PRIMARY to the BACKUP, and reboot the PRIMARY, then it seems the BACKUP remains active only, and does not fail back to the PRIMARY. In the current days with the not so free version (above) it appears to match the above behavior. The question is how is LVS supposed to failover/back in the above two scenerios, (1) network disconnect between PRIMARY and SECONDARY, and (2) purposfully failover to BACKUP, then boot PRIMARY again. How come auto-negotiates and PRIMARY wins in case 1, but not case 2 ? Thanks Peter __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what you?re looking for faster http://search.yahoo.com From vikrant40k at email2me.net Fri Mar 26 23:38:57 2004 From: vikrant40k at email2me.net (Vee Victor) Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2004 07:38:57 +0800 Subject: red hat 9.0 + Piranha-gui + LVS (ultramonkey) Message-ID: <20040326233858.075307A88F7@ws4-4.us4.outblaze.com> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: