On Jan 31, 2008, at 4:28 AM, Aaron Glenn wrote:
> CARP *and* pfsync.
> this late at night off the top of my head I can't see any blatantly
> obvious reason this wouldn't work (with at least pgpool that is, dunno
> about your data)
we use CARP to balance and failover some webserver pairs. We also use
it to balance our internal DNS caches to our internal clients. The
only drawback is that once you pass a router, all traffic from that
router will go to a single CARP host -- ie, you get failover but no
balance.
Other than that, it makes upgrading systems nearly invisible to the
other servers. For critical things like DNS, this is a big win.
