RAID VPS Mirror/Mirroring Hosting?
Feb 24, 2009I was wondering if anyone knows of any provider that provides RAID VPS Mirrored Hosting.
So if one drive goes down, the site will immediately switch over to the next one in the cluster.
I was wondering if anyone knows of any provider that provides RAID VPS Mirrored Hosting.
So if one drive goes down, the site will immediately switch over to the next one in the cluster.
2 servers in 2 different continent. One will be primary and the other is redundant. It will be controlled by DNS fail over service.
Question:
1. What is the things that i need to consider before setting it up?
2. What is the best way to sync the data and databases?
We recently began to mirror a large number of open source projects with a dedicated mirror server on our network and I was surprised not only with how popular the mirror server has become, is, but also of the ability of the hardware we're using to keep up with the load.
At an given time, the mirror seems to be pushing at least 50 Megabits of trafficthe server is also an IRC server (irc.igsobe.com) for customers and internal staff communications.
The hardware is a low end Dell Pentium 4 @ 2.66 GHZ server, running with 512MB of RAM and a 400 GB ATA hard drive. CentOS v5.3 is the operating system.
If you're interested, you can view the HTML logfile analysis here but that doesn't tell the full story as FTP users make up a good portion of the traffic. We've received over a quarter million hits in the first few days of November alone.
18:14:15 up 65 days, 9:04, 5 users, load average: 0.31, 0.69, 0.56
The only change that I made to the default configuration was lowering the maximum number of Apache servers to 128.
Just thought I'd share this information as I wouldn't have thought a server with such a small amount of RAM would be able to serve up so much data, even though we are talking strictly static HTML files.
I'll definitely keep this in mind when clients ask me for those "what type of dedicated server should I use for XXX" type discussions that are had all too often with clients.
A great insight to alot of my research and thank you in advance for any advice given.
I have a server based in HK(with WHMCS) and host several websites. The speed and availability serves the Asia Pacific market/viewers well; but we have several new websites that also targets the European and North American viewers.
I have been researching on getting a dedicated server based in US to mirror our server. Therefore allowing the US/European market to access the website faster. Although we have a few problems (and very little budget to solve it too ;p)
1. We need to sync the two servers in real time ; rsync seems to be the best but is there any other reccomendations?
2. We will make the IP address in each servers the same, so our clients need not change their dns. Do we need IPcast/anycast?
3. Is there anything else that I may have oversight?
My company requires a Mirrored Server setup. I hope someone can direct me to the right solution which guarantees the least downtime.
- We have 20+ php/mysql websites.
- We need two dedicated servers hosted in 2 different datacentres.
- Users are directed to the first server.
- If the first server is down the users are automatically directed to the 2nd server @ the 2nd datacentre.
- The software/hardware which redirects the users need to be fail proof or have an instant backup which takes over incase that goes down too.
- Data (databases and files) needs to be synced correctly to avoid data not being mirrored correctly.
I've done some reading and there is alot of mention of the DNS round and load balancers.
However, it seems these two options are also not fail proof.
Would appreciate if someone could simply outlining what system would be best for us for 100% uptime incase of server failure.
i am new to this and am in need of some help.. i have vbulletin 3.5.0 installed with photopost gallery and phpprobid auction...
I am hosted with fasthosts on a linux dedicated server, it is crap! it has been down 3 times in 1 month, the support is terrrible.. I have already movedit from pipex hosting due to lack of support for mysql. i canot keep moving my site, my brain will melt out of my ears ...
Can i link to my original install.. so if the fasthost server goes down,, could i have it directed to the old server? and can i keep the 2 databases current?
Hope i have explained it well enough... basically need a backup server setup for my vbulletin so, i dont lose potential new members..
I have a DB server, running mysql 64bit. I would like to add another server to the mix to build some kind of redundancy if the 1st one were to go down.
View 7 Replies View RelatedI have two dedicated servers on two different countries. My idea is having one of them fully active and the other as a backup server so that in case the first crashes or something I only have to redirect the domains to the second server.
Can you help me on how this can be done?
There are some Download Manager Programs that have a option like Find alternate URLs through mirror list file when giving a file for downloading. Where can I insert such a file in my site so that download programs can add other mirrors to it from my list of mirrors?
View 0 Replies View RelatedDoes anyone run a setup where 2 or more cPanel servers (perhaps in a shared hosting environment) are dynamically mirrored for high availability?
How have you configured this? Does cPanel play nicely?
We are expanding our photo sharing business and are revising our Unix-based server architecture. We're looking to develop a standard server configuration so that we can easily add servers when necessary.
Our ISP has recommended a configuration with mirrored web servers and mirrored RAID5 NAS boxes. I've read about Google's server architecture which consists of identical mirrored servers; when a drive or part from one of those servers goes down, data is served from the mirrored servers and the bad machine is repaired or replaced.
Comparing the two architectures with similar storage sizes, the overall cost of the hardware itself is about the same, with the identical mirrored machines being slightly cheaper. The monthly co-location fees (rack, power, etc.) are higher for the NAS solution.
I'm interested to hear your thoughts and experiences with similar solutions. I know the web/NAS solution is popular, and it's probably the one we'll go with, initially at least. Has anyone here implemented a Google-like identical mirrored server solution?
Keeping mirrored backups...anything better than rsync?
I'm keeping mirrored backups of my servers. Does anyone know of any solution better than rsync to update the files on the backup server?
I've noticed that when running rsync it can cause a lot of disk i/o, which can slow down a running server.
Does anyone have any suggestions on how to decrease disk i/o or another solution to keeping mirrored backups on a secondary server?
I currently have a mirror site set-up on a seperate server (with a seperate web hosting company) for risk management purposes.
For zero downtime dependability, a load balancer cluster checking both servers in real time, and directing traffic at only servers that were online has been suggested.
However this option is rather expensive. Does anyone know of any other options?
I was asked earlier today by one of the tech people at the university that I go to if I knew of any hosts that would offer some space/bw/access for a website that already exists. From what I was told, the host would not be the primary server for the website, so it would not require very much bandwidth, and the entirety of the website is only 300MB, so space isn't really an issue either (As most hosts now a days offer 1GB+). The catch is that they were planning on using rsync to update the mirror host, with the latest content from the live website, every 3 hours or so. Preferably, they want to spend as little money as possible on this and not buy a dedicated server or VPS somewhere, as that would be very costly.
So, does anyone here know of a host that would offer such a thing and allow SSH access to setup the rsync?
I am trying to find a piece of software that will allow me to mirror the online files of my companies domain. There are a number of contributers to the domain, so files are not stored offline in one location. I want to create an exact mirror of the contents that perhaps I schedule to mirror once every week.
I cant seem to find anything that would allow me to do this.... can anyone point me in the right direction?
I have a LAMP server running and would like to have the exact mirror running on another location. I would like to sync the web files and database in either real time (upon any update) or in delayed mode (x minutes after the update).
For MySQL, I believe replication can do the job unless anybody has better recommendation. What would you guys suggest for web files? Can I use different Linux flavor but maintain back the same LAMP version?
Is there any "online" 3rd party load balancing service that I could use to load balance the traffic to both servers?
On a CentOS5 VPS I have access to "yum update" barely working due to the base mirror "styx.biochem.wfubmc.edu" being tremendously slow.
I'm trying to find out how to disable that mirror possibly via a mirror exclude setting in yum.conf or some other way. I've been searching but I've not found any documentation on this so hopefully somebody out there will know how to make this change.
I'm having an issue with a client site and I am not sure what to do at this point. Conversations with the host (GoDaddy) haven't led to a solution and to be honest, I'm not sure it's their issue to handle although I will be firing off an email to their domain dispute department shortly. I spoke with a couple of supervisors there and they were as baffled as I am.
Here's the situation:
When people Google the name of the client's business, it returns their site but on a different domain. The entire site is there, nothing is changed but the URL. It's like having an unintentional mirror site except that none of the forms work which is what tipped off the users that something was wrong but of course, they don't notice that they're not actually on 'www.clientsite.com' so they think it's just a form error when in actuality, they're not even at the right domain.
There is really no way for this other domain to profit from mirroring the client's site; it's just a business profile type of thing with a few forms for contact, employment applications and vendor applications. No secure info is transmitted other than perhaps the occasional email address but we're not talking a heavy volume site, it's a niche market and really not something that would be a typical target. There's no eCommerce, no subscriptions, no financial info.
I'm at a total loss. Could this happen if this other site is hosted on the same server as my client's site? Could it be an actual error of some sort or would it have to be intentional?
The whois for this bogus site leads to DomainsbyProxy.com and I'll be sending them a letter as well but I'd really appreciate any input you all might have on HOW this could happen. Should I also contact Google?
We damaged a file on a windows server 2003 system which caused us to get a grey screen where the login windows should be (it was setup as a domain controller)
We tried booting it in safe mode and all the other modes etc etc.... but to no avail... we couldn't get it to work.
So we wanted to replace the file manually using another pc (by inserting one of the harddrives into the pc, and copying the file to it).
We used a windows XP machine.... imported the harddrive using disk management..... we had to un mirror the drive to be able to access it.
Once the mirror was broken i gave it a drive letter, copied the the new file to it, and, removed the drive letter i assigned it, and tried booting with *just* that drive in the windows 2003 server.
Now it wont boot, it just reboots everytime i tries to start up, probably because we broke the mirror on a different machine.
It still boots from the other untouched drive... that was in the mirror, but we have no way to edit the files on there.
So is there any way to actually get this, once mirrored drive, to boot now its a single disc?
If you receive the following errors while trying to install a Perl Module through the WHM ...
View 1 Replies View RelatedAnyone knows the CLI command for rebuilding a mirror raid for Adaptec 2410?
View 1 Replies View RelatedI am looking for Backup Utility . Came across this two terms
Are RAID 1 & HDD mirroring synonyms?
Which is better RAID 1 & HDD mirroring?
I am in the process of restructuring the infrastructure on our servers. I am thinking of using either RAID 5 (1 hot spare) vs RAID 10 as my 1U server has 4 HDD tray.
RAID 5 would have better capacity but RAID 10 has better overall performance. Which one do you guys go for a shared hosting server?
Quote:
Today we are going to conduct a detailed study of RAIDability of contemporary 400GB hard drives on a new level. We will take two "professional" drives from Seagate and Western Digital and four ordinary "desktop" drives for our investigation. The detailed performance analysis and some useful hints on building RAID arrays are in our new detailed article.
[url]
support request should be on average 30minute or less, at no time no longer then 1 hour.
raid 1, sata, size does not matter
preferably core2duo
I`m building some Xeon Nehalem servers for shared hosting with cPanel. The servers will be:
Dell PowerEdge R410
Xeon Nehalem E5502
12GB DDR3 RAM
3ware raid controller
But for shared hosting, is it worthy to have a RAID-10, or would a RAID-1 be enough?
We have some Xeon E3xxx servers running with RAID-1 hosting more than 1000 accounts, we hadn`t had any IO/load problem so far.
Can any one please suggest which raid level is best for a file hosting site?
View 14 Replies View RelatedIs Motherboard RAID as good as a dedicated PCI-E card? I am guessing a dedicated card is the best option, though costs more.
We are looking at buying a barebones server from Supermicro. It features an onboard RAID controller which supports RAID 0, 1, 5 & 10 - but for some strange reason it will only support RAID 5 if you use Windows. Here is a link to the page detailing the RAID features.
[url]
We are going to be running Linux, CentOS 5.1, so we will only have the choice of RAID 0, 1 or 10. This isn't an issue, as having RAID 10 on 4x SAS (15k) drives will be fine for speed and stability. What is an issue is would this RAID controller be as fast or reliable compared to a dedicated PCI-E card? If it can only use RAID 5 in windows, does that suggest this controller is too reliant on software? It would be a nightmare to suffer downtime and data loss because the controller couldn't hack it during a drive failure, or one day it decided to bugger up the array when rebooting.
So that leads me to looking at this card, this looks very good for what we need. Are adaptec a reliable brand? I've seen it advertised for £200, which is a good price.
[url]
This card features RAID 5 and 6, would RAID 6 be better than RAID 10 for redundancy, or is it too slow to bother with? Also it seems to have a battery module available for it, what does this achieve? Cos surely if the power dies the hard drives and motherboard can't run off this little battery, or does it just help the controller stay alive long enough with some hard drive information in its memory if the power goes out during a rebuild?
I could try the Software-RAID 5 of the EQ9 Server of Hetzner.
Does anyone here has experiences, how fast a hardware raid 5 compared against the software-Raid 5 is?
The i7-975 should have enough power to compute the redundnacy on the fly, so there would be a minimal impact on performance. But I have no idea.
I want to run the server under ubuntu 8.04 LTS x64.
On it a vitualisation like VMware the IO-Load could get really high.
So I've just got a server with 2xSATA raid 1 (OS, cpanel and everything in here) and 4xSCSI raid 10 (clean).
Which one do you guys think will give the best performance:
1. Move mysql only to 4xSCSI raid 10
2. Move mysql and home folder to 4xSCSI raid 10
I am in a somewhat complicated situation... I wanted to order a custom server with hardware 3Ware RAID controller but after over a month of waiting I was told the HW RAID controller, as well as any other 3Ware controller they tried, does not work with the motherboard used in the server from Fujitsu-Siemens and that they simply got a reply from FS that the controller is not certified to work with their motherboard.
So although I'd prefer a HW raid, I am forced to either choose a different webhost or setup a software RAID. The problem is, I haven't done that before and am somewhat moderately...scared
I have read a lot of the info about SW RAID on Linux that I could find through Google but there are some questions unanswered still. So I thought that perhaps some of the more knowledgeable WHT members could help me with this problem...
The server specs will be:
Core2Duo E6600 (2.4Ghz), 2GB RAM, 6-8x* 250GB SATA II HDDs, CentOS 4.4 or SuSe, DirectAdmin
* I prefer 8 HDDs (or actually 9) over 6 but I am not sure if their server chassis can hold that many HDDs, I am awaiting answer from them. They don't have any other drives beside the 250GB ones so I am limited to those.
The preferred SW RAID setup is to have everything in RAID 10, except for the /boot partition which has to be on RAID-1 or no RAID I believe, plus one drive as hot spare (that would be the 9th drive). I am quite sure they will not do the setup for me but will give me access to KVM over IP and a Linux image preinstalled on the first HDD so that I'll have a functional system that needs to be upgraded to RAID-10.
How do I do that? The big problem I see is that LILO or GRUB can't boot from a software RAID-5/10 so I will have to mount the /boot partition elsewhere. It's probably terribly simple...if you have done it before which I have not. I have read some articles on how to setup a RAID-5/10 with mdadm (e.g. [url] ) but they usually do not talk about how to setup the boot partition. Should it be setup as a small sized (100-200MB) RAID-1 partition spread over all of the drives in the otherwise RAID-10 array?
What about swap? Should I create a 4-8GB (I plan to upgrade the server RAM to 4GB in near future) RAID-1 swap partition on each of the disks or swap to a file on the main RAID-10 partitions. The second sounds simpler but what about performance? Is swapping to a file on RAID-10 array a bad idea, performance wise?
Is it possible to grow a RAID-10 array in a way similar to growing a RAID-5 array with mdadm (using two extra drives instead of one of course)? mdadm doesn't actually even mention RAID-10 despite it does support it without having to create RAID-0 on top of RAID-1 pairs if the support is in kernel, from what I know.