Webmaster forum - 2 hosting servers

Author

2 hosting servers

Ganesh

2006-11-19, 7:58 pm

I've two shared hosting servers.

When 1 goes down I manually change the dns settings to start the other
one. Is there any better solution?

Ganesh J. Acharya

Karl Groves

2006-11-19, 7:58 pm

"Ganesh" <ganeshjacharya@XXXXXXXXXX> wrote in news:1163404902.371967.201900
@f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:

> I've two shared hosting servers.
>
> When 1 goes down I manually change the dns settings to start the other
> one. Is there any better solution?
>

If one goes down, by the time the DNS change propagates, if the first one
is still down, you need a new host.

But to answer your question most registrars allow 4 nameserver entries.
Use two from host #1 and two from host #2.

--
Karl Groves
www.karlcore.com

Els

2006-11-19, 7:58 pm

Karl Groves wrote:

> But to answer your question most registrars allow 4 nameserver entries.
> Use two from host #1 and two from host #2.

I thought that would mean alternating 'website' and 'no website' to
visitors?

--
Els http://locusmeus.com/

Dylan Parry

2006-11-19, 7:58 pm

Els wrote:

> I thought that would mean alternating 'website' and 'no website' to
> visitors?

No. Round-robin DNS /should/ send the client the IP addresses in a
random order so that each server gets hit (on average) an equal number
of times. A clever client would normally attempt to contact the second
IP address on the list if the first one fails, then the third and so on.

It's simple, It's crude, but then it is probably adequate.

--
Dylan Parry
http://electricfreedom.org | http://webpageworkshop.co.uk

Programming, n: A pastime similar to banging one's head
against a wall, but with fewer opportunities for reward.

William Tasso

2006-11-19, 7:58 pm

Fleeing from the madness of the jungle
Dylan Parry <usenet@dylanparry.com> stumbled into news:alt.www.webmaster
and said:

> Els wrote:
>
>
> No. Round-robin DNS /should/ send the client the IP addresses in a
> random order so that each server gets hit (on average) an equal number
> of times. A clever client would normally attempt to contact the second
> IP address on the list if the first one fails, then the third and so on.

IS there a list of 'clever' client apps that claim this functionality?

Seems to me they'd have to find a way of disarming the cache of every name
server between them and the authoritative name server.

> It's simple, It's crude, but then it is probably adequate.

AWW?

--
William Tasso

http://williamtasso.com/words/what-is-usenet.asp

Matt Probert

2006-11-19, 7:58 pm

On Mon, 13 Nov 2006 12:49:19 +0000, Dylan Parry
<usenet@dylanparry.com> wrote:

>It's simple, It's crude, but then it is probably adequate.

Fnarrr!

<bg>

Matt

--
Woe to him that willfully innovates, while ignorant of the constant.
http://www.probertencyclopaedia.com

Els

2006-11-19, 7:58 pm

Dylan Parry wrote:

> Els wrote:
>
>
> No. Round-robin DNS /should/ send the client the IP addresses in a
> random order so that each server gets hit (on average) an equal number
> of times. A clever client would normally attempt to contact the second
> IP address on the list if the first one fails, then the third and so on.

How would this client tell the difference between a 404, 'no website
was configured at this address', a 'Success! Apache has been
installed.'-message, and an actual website?
IME, an IP address doesn't always fail when a server/website is down.

--
Els http://locusmeus.com/

Alex

2006-11-19, 7:58 pm

"Karl Groves" <karl@NOSPAMkarlcore.com> wrote in message
news:Xns987A4CFEA8BD2karlkarlcorecom@216.196.97.136...
> "Ganesh" <ganeshjacharya@XXXXXXXXXX> wrote in news:1163404902.371967.201900
> @f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
>
> If one goes down, by the time the DNS change propagates, if the first one
> is still down, you need a new host.
> But to answer your question most registrars allow 4 nameserver entries.
> Use two from host #1 and two from host #2.
> --
> Karl Groves
> www.karlcore.com

Karl, I think you are suggesting a setup like NS1.firstserver.com,
NS2.firstserver.com, NS1.server2.com, ns2.server2.com.

Could one instead set up the nameservers as NS1.firsterver.com,
NS1.server2.com, NS2.firstserver.com, NS2.server2.com?

Alex

Dylan Parry

2006-11-19, 7:58 pm

Els wrote:

> IME, an IP address doesn't always fail when a server/website is down.

If the server is down then there won't be *any* response. The server
returning the incorrect content, however, is a totally different matter.
A more complex system of load balancing or a a more comprehensive backup
plan would be better here. There's no way that a DNS implementation
alone would work.

--
Dylan Parry
http://electricfreedom.org | http://webpageworkshop.co.uk

Programming, n: A pastime similar to banging one's head
against a wall, but with fewer opportunities for reward.

Viper

2006-11-19, 7:58 pm

Ganesh wrote:
> I've two shared hosting servers.
>
> When 1 goes down I manually change the dns settings to start the other
> one. Is there any better solution?
>
If your host was good there would be little to NO down time.
Go with a VPS or dedicated and you have better control over "down time".
Should cost you about the same for a VPS that you pay for 2 shared accounts,
that is unless you are going with some cheap get what you pay for shared
host...

Ken Sims

2006-11-19, 7:58 pm

Hi William -

On Mon, 13 Nov 2006 13:45:23 -0000, "William Tasso"
<SpamBlocked@tbdata.com> wrote:

>IS there a list of 'clever' client apps that claim this functionality?

I don't know. Any modern client should be providing this
functionality.

>Seems to me they'd have to find a way of disarming the cache of every name
>server between them and the authoritative name server.

Nope. The name servers return multiple IP addresses in the response.

Stupid clients use just the first one in the list.

Smart clients start with the first one in the list. If no connection,
they try the others, one at a time.

--
Ken
http://www.kensims.net/