2

We have 5 physical servers. All are identical. 16 gb ram, 4x146 10k sas in raid 10.

So, we need high availability. Current plan is following:

2 boxes with Heartbeat for load balancing. At this moment nginx is configured as balancer.

then problem is web & mysql. I plan to set up 2 boxes running mysql and nginx. Between theses boxes set up mysql replication in master <-> master. Then add latest box which has replicated mysql. For this model each webserver connects to its local mysql server. (to minimize network latency).

Schema for my model

Other model is to put two boxes (nginx) in HA and another two boxes in mysql master/slave. but in this model load balancer is alone ....

Or i need another setup. Basically i don't need how to do it, but which model to choose. We need to handle lot of traffic (about 20k req/s).

Improve this question
2
  • 1
    If you planing connecting to local mysql then your model is wrong because you cant do inserts or updates on slave unless the system is doing selects only
    – B14D3
    May 11, 2012 at 10:28
  • MySQL can be a slave to only one master. Am I missing something?
    – John Gardeniers
    May 11, 2012 at 10:30

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
0

Three recommendations.

1.) Consider using HA Proxy over nginx for your load balancing.

[EDIT]
Things to consider when considering HA Proxy over HttpUpstream:

HttpUpstream:

  • "This module provides simple load-balancing (round-robin and client IP) across backend servers. "

HA Proxy:

  • TCP Load balancing
  • Hot reload
  • Connection Queuing
  • Comprehensive stats page
  • Socket communication including ability to mark servers as down
  • ACL's
  • 'Sticky' Load balancing
  • etc
  • etc
  • etc

HA Proxy is really the go-to free load balancer IMO.
[EDIT/]

2.) Look into caching. Profile production queries against a sample of production( or the like) data. Hitting the database 20k times a second could destroy your database servers. That's 1.7 BILLION transactions per day assuming each request incurs only ONE transaction. That's a LOT. Squid, memcached, redis, etc can save your bacon here if caching is possible.

3.) Did I mention profiling?

It's hard to suggest a course of action without knowing your applications resource usage patterns. For instance, you may find you'll have to put MySQL on two dedicated boxes to keep up with query demand. On the other hand, HA proxy is extremely memory and cpu efficient. You could probably get away with having your HA Proxy setup share resources on two of your web heads.

Improve this answer
3
  • Please justify your first point. It's entirely possible that it's valid but you've got to explain why.
    – Martin Fjordvald
    May 11, 2012 at 17:50
  • I think that caching is possible. One problem is that i am only sys admin. so, i don't know what is going on application level. And i do not know if database indexes are set properly..
    – Guntis
    May 11, 2012 at 20:40
  • Please see my edit in reference to HA Proxy. It's what we deploy for customers where I work. Also, you're really going to want to work with the devs to do testing/benchmarking so you can choose and verify the best course of action. If that's not possible, as a sysadmin, you can use something like mysql proxy to get a view into what queries are being run and use those to profile your database setup.
    – Rapzid
    May 12, 2012 at 2:24

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .