Gabriel Wicke wrote:
On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 08:40:14 -0800, Jimmy Wales wrote:
In particular, I think that Gabriel's "artist's impression" of load balancer in front of squid in front of apache in front of mysql is the right thing to do.
Hi Jimmy,
i've looked at Squid's failover and load balancing capabilities a bit- the short story: we could do without any separate load balancer with slightly better performance and HA.
Internet |----------- Bind DNS round robin _______|______ (multiple A records) | |Squid Squid Squid Tier1 (connected with heartbeat) ___|______________|___ | | | Apache Apache Apache |___________|__________| | | MySQL MySQL
The Details about the Squid setup are on http://www.aulinx.de/oss/code/wikipedia/.
This would free resources to throw on MySQL.
Gabriel Wicke
The Apache and MySQL systems could all exist on the same switched network (even though the data flow would remain as above), making the system a bit simpler to build and administer, whilst still keeping advantage of having the Squid machines as a full proxy firewall for the back-end machines:
Internet |----------- Bind DNS round robin _______|______ (multiple A records) | | Squid Squid Squid Tier1 (with heartbeat) ___|______________|_________________________ | | | | | Apache Apache Apache MySQL MySQL ...
Switch speed should not be an issue: an Ethernet switched network will scale to Gbit speeds, at which time the Distributed Squid Borg would probably be a natural follow-on from Gabriel's design.
-- Neil