Server Fault is a question and answer site for system and network administrators. It's 100% free, no registration required.

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

We have quite a high traffic, php intensive site; process quite large chunks of data which get cached.

I admit, i'm terrible to commit to change with server configs.

But we need a new, failover solution.

We have tried Nginx+PHP5-FPM in the past and found it threw too many 50x errors. Believe or not we still run Apache+mod_php, APC and memcache and it's stable and reliable.

However we need better fail over and eventually off site redundancy. Don't mention the Amazon Cloud, we didnt get on too well with that either.

So for someone like myself, risk adverse to changing a config / set up that i know yields good performance for our web app how do i introduce the right load balancer?

Essentially 2 load balancers in cluster running heartbeat for eliminate that single point of failure. Load Balancing several web boxes in case 1 or 2 break.

But what LB is stable to use. I like the sound of Zen Load Balancer but i'm also drawn to varnish to reverse proxy and also balance the traffic.

We have a rackspace set up with a LB on another project and it gives us grief, so i just need a stable solution that will LB / failover without any dropped connections or 500 errors.

share|improve this question

closed as not constructive by John Gardeniers, Magellan, pauska, mdpc, EEAA Oct 27 '12 at 2:50

As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

If you are asking about a good to use software load-balancing application, I'd vote 2 for HAProxy. It's a very stable, very configurable, light-weighted, software load-balancer.

We are using it for months now, and it's processing millions request a day. A Simple, Opteron Dual-Core box - 4 Gig Ram - is doing the job with HAProxy installed, load never been higher than 0.5 Hope this little info would help you in your consideration.

share|improve this answer

Haproxy .

If you are sticking to a cloud provider, take a look at heartbeat for failover of a shared IP, and just leave the haproxy running on both (upstart, monit, etc).

if you are running on your own hardware, or a network that allows multicast traffic, take a look at keepalived to failover a shared IP and make sure haproxy is running.

I server over 1m requests per day in some of my datacenter locations, on 512m Xen VM's, and they are at like .01 load. Doesn't take a work horse to balance traffic. :)

Another option (if you just want a simple load balancing) and are willing to move to, is their NodeBalancers, which offer TCP or HTTP based balancing with healthchecks. Used them for a while, worked well, but moved away due to some constraints.

share|improve this answer

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