Re: FW: Multiple cache servers with failover ?

Hello,

i have configured two machines for automatic failover via short scripts. I
did not implemented consistend caches because one squid is the primary
cache and the other squid is hot standby. If the primary machine is dead
the second machine will take over the ip. Squid then starts with an empty
cache which does not bother me because squid then fetches the content from
internet.

I do have a documentation of this configuration and the scripts but it�s
all in german.

If you - or other - are interested i can put it online.

Regards,

Stephan Sachweh
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stephan Sachweh, Dipl.-Inform., ExperTeam AG
Tel: +49 231 9704 221 Fax: +49 231 9704 299 Mobile: +49 171 4632098

|--------+--------------------------->
| | "Carpenter, Dean"|
| | <Dean.Carpenter@p|
| | harma.com> |
| | |
| | 13.03.2000 15:31 |
| | |
|--------+--------------------------->
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------|
  | |
  | To: "'squid-users@ircache.net'" <squid-users@ircache.net> |
  | cc: (bcc: Stephan Sachweh/Dortmund/ExperTeam/DE) |
  | Subject: FW: Multiple cache servers with failover ? |
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------|

Hey all -

I sent this in last week, and haven't heard a peep. Is there no one out
there using (or trying to) squid in a failover/HA environment ?

--
Dean Carpenter deano@areyes.com
94 TT :)       Dean.Carpenter@pharma.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Carpenter, Dean
Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2000 4:55 PM
To: squid-users@ircache.net
Subject: Multiple cache servers with failover ?
Has anyone tried an implementation with two or more squids and IP failover
?
(Linux-HA)
That is, I want the user community to be split between two servers acting
as
siblings, 10.1.0.1 and 10.1.0.2.  If one or the other fails, have the other
take over the failed IP address.  Since they're siblings, their caches
should be fairly consistent.
The only hassle I can see is when 10.1.0.1 takes over for 10.1.0.2, thus
answering for both addresses - this may screw up the squid sibling cache
workings ...  That is, 10.1.0.1 is configured to talk to 10.1.0.2 as a
sibling, but now it IS 10.1.0.2.  Forwarding loop ?
If not like this, how can we setup a redundant pair of caches ?