Server Fault is a question and answer site for system and network administrators. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Based on this question:, LVS may be the right solution for my problem.

But when I went to its homepage, I found that LVS has been updated since Nov, 2008. The world's moving fast, and I don't know if LVS was obsolete or not.

Is LVS standing still, or there're some better solutions to replace it?

Thank you so much.

share|improve this question
It looks from the web site like a new version of the ipvsadm management tool was released Feb 2011. The actual LVS implementation is in the Linux kernel though and is currently maintained. – mtinberg Jun 24 '11 at 22:39
up vote 4 down vote accepted

I use it currently in a highly available production environment serving numerous public users. I swear by it and would encourage you to give it a try.

With that said, there are alternatives depending on your application and preference. These include:

share|improve this answer
It may be a bug that I can't vote up this answer! – Vimvq1987 Mar 31 '10 at 8:15

As of 2016 the LVS code is still maintained in the Linux kernel tree as a subset of the netfilter code. In the kernel tree check under: and ...Documentation/networking/ipvs-sysctl.txt

The ipvsadm tooling is stable, not obsolete and can still be downloaded from

As far as I can tell IPv6 support for IPVS never made it past the experimental stage so that may be detractor.

The active development is now primarily found in keepalived that builds on LVS.

share|improve this answer

We use components of the LVS for high availability solutions (specifically, keepalived to float virtual IPs from server to server as required).

share|improve this answer

Yes - it is old. But: It is stable.

We use it in conjunction with another "old" add-on: lvs-kiss. That one seems to be pretty "dead" too.

The best about lvs is that it is fast. This is because it works on layer 2/3 - which is also its greatest drawback. It has no idea what a http-session is.

Tomcat does - you can put lvs in front of any service - if each of the servers providing that service does share its session information with the other servers you will have a pretty good combination.

The only drawback of LVS is IMHO the fixed time setting for replicating (ip-)session informatation to a slave lvs-server.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.