[racktables-users] Re: loadbalancer as a vm
- From: Dean Hamstead <dean@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: racktables-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 21:50:42 +1100
We are using LVS on el5 as KVM vm's without any dramas
If you are using DR then they do so little work its worth virtualising them.
Dean
On 18/03/11 21:44, Dave Augustus wrote:
In my situation, we have some loadbalancers which are currently physical
but we are planning to make them virtual on CentOS 5.5 kvm. But I see
that after adding some loadbalanced-services, I can only designate a
PHYSICAL host as a load balancer. We are using a VM (ESX) currently
without a problem but this observation brings up a few questions in my
mind.
Is it a "good" practice to have a VM serve as a load balancer?
How can I use Racktables to signify this without "fudging" my current
setup by making those VMs physical?
Thanks,
Dave
Other related posts:
