>
> Thank you for the input. Let's forget about XEN for a moment, I was
> actually looking at setting up a cluster which has fail-over & load
> balancing capabilities, regardless of what runs on it. If XEN
> enterprise is the only option,then I'm not going to bother. I don't
> see why I need to pay for a tool which has a helpdesk and
> "professional technicians standing by" to help me when I get stuck, if
> XEN can do the same.
>
i cant speak for others but when i talk of clusters and load balancing i
talk of different things. For load balancing i'd lean towards LVS and
for clusters then it very much depends on what you are clustering.
Application servers, databases, mail servers etc etc. For a MySQL
'cluster' i'd probably go for master<>master depending on how many nodes
i need and the application type etc. If its application clusters then
things like tomcat can know about each other and take over if one of
them dies. I think that the point i'm trying to make is that the
solution very much depends on what you are trying to achieve, so to me
'regardless what runs on it' is not really something to aim a good
answer at.
As mentioned i am pretty sure that if you want to make your own 'cloud'
in todays speak then you may well be looking commercial.
Thats just my thoughts and its most probable i am wrong.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
