|
Home > Archive > Macromedia Flash Server > May 2006 > FMS failover and possible load-balancing
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
FMS failover and possible load-balancing
|
|
| Dan Halbert 2006-05-16, 1:11 pm |
| Hi. We are using FMS 2.01 to serve up static .FLV files. One server is
sufficient for our bandwidth needs now, but we want high reliability.
Currently we have a warm spare available.
Going to Origin/Edge is overkill and too costly, and the Edge server is
still a single point of failure. But we could buy a second license and
use a highly reliable hardware load balancer on the front. But are there
hardware load balancers that deal with the (presumably stateful) RTMP
protocol? Do we need to do OSI level 7 load balancing?
We are actually currently using RTMPT to be accessible to the widest
audience (due to other people's firewalls), and if that is being used in
a stateless way, perhaps a lower-level load balancer would suffice.
I'd be interested in hearing any practical failover or load-balancing
experience.
Thanks a lot,
Dan
________________________________________
_______
FlashComm-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software
Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training
http://www.figleaf.com
http://training.figleaf.com
| |
| Mark de Jong [NetMasters BV] 2006-05-16, 1:11 pm |
| Hi Dan,
We've done something like it on which we did software loadbalancing (last
european soccer championships in 2004). This means that if no connection can
be made with server 1 (at place A) the application automatically will try
the second server (at place B). You can make this as sophisticated as you
need without much costs. However this is only useful with simple on-demand
streaming (so no live chat for instance) and the on-demand video's are
static data. Just call it a fail-over. Hope this helps, at least it is
cost-efficient and a lot less hassle. 
Kind regards,
Mark de Jong
NetMasters BV
www.netmasters.nl / www.flashhosting.nl
-----Original Message-----
From: flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
[mailto:flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org] On Behalf Of Dan Halbert
Sent: dinsdag 16 mei 2006 16:29
To: FlashComm Mailing List
Subject: [FlashComm] FMS failover and possible load-balancing
Hi. We are using FMS 2.01 to serve up static .FLV files. One server is
sufficient for our bandwidth needs now, but we want high reliability.
Currently we have a warm spare available.
Going to Origin/Edge is overkill and too costly, and the Edge server is
still a single point of failure. But we could buy a second license and use a
highly reliable hardware load balancer on the front. But are there hardware
load balancers that deal with the (presumably stateful) RTMP protocol? Do we
need to do OSI level 7 load balancing?
We are actually currently using RTMPT to be accessible to the widest
audience (due to other people's firewalls), and if that is being used in a
stateless way, perhaps a lower-level load balancer would suffice.
I'd be interested in hearing any practical failover or load-balancing
experience.
Thanks a lot,
Dan
________________________________________
_______
FlashComm-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software
Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com
http://training.figleaf.com
________________________________________
_______
FlashComm-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software
Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training
http://www.figleaf.com
http://training.figleaf.com
| |
| Jake Hilton 2006-05-16, 1:11 pm |
| You could also take a look at this article.
http://www.adobe.com/devnet/flashco...clustering.html
Jake
On 5/16/06, Mark de Jong [NetMasters BV] <m.dejong-xV3ERUhIFs7Tz9+aGeySBg@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Dan,
>
> We've done something like it on which we did software loadbalancing (last
> european soccer championships in 2004). This means that if no connection
> can
> be made with server 1 (at place A) the application automatically will try
> the second server (at place B). You can make this as sophisticated as you
> need without much costs. However this is only useful with simple on-deman=
d
> streaming (so no live chat for instance) and the on-demand video's are
> static data. Just call it a fail-over. Hope this helps, at least it is
> cost-efficient and a lot less hassle.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Mark de Jong
> NetMasters BV
> www.netmasters.nl / www.flashhosting.nl
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
> [mailto:flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org] On Behalf Of Dan Halbert
> Sent: dinsdag 16 mei 2006 16:29
> To: FlashComm Mailing List
> Subject: [FlashComm] FMS failover and possible load-balancing
>
> Hi. We are using FMS 2.01 to serve up static .FLV files. One server is
> sufficient for our bandwidth needs now, but we want high reliability.
> Currently we have a warm spare available.
>
> Going to Origin/Edge is overkill and too costly, and the Edge server is
> still a single point of failure. But we could buy a second license and us=
e
> a
> highly reliable hardware load balancer on the front. But are there
> hardware
> load balancers that deal with the (presumably stateful) RTMP protocol? Do
> we
> need to do OSI level 7 load balancing?
>
> We are actually currently using RTMPT to be accessible to the widest
> audience (due to other people's firewalls), and if that is being used in =
a
> stateless way, perhaps a lower-level load balancer would suffice.
>
> I'd be interested in hearing any practical failover or load-balancing
> experience.
>
> Thanks a lot,
> Dan
> ________________________________________
_______
> FlashComm-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
> To change your subscription options or search the archive:
> http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
>
> Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software
> Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com
> http://training.figleaf.com
>
> ________________________________________
_______
> FlashComm-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
> To change your subscription options or search the archive:
> http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
>
> Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software
> Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training
> http://www.figleaf.com
> http://training.figleaf.com
>
________________________________________
_______
FlashComm-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software
Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training
http://www.figleaf.com
http://training.figleaf.com
|
|
|
|
|