Home
| Calendar
| Mail Lists
| List Archives
| Desktop SIG
| Hardware Hacking SIG
Wiki | Flickr | PicasaWeb | Video | Maps & Directions | Installfests | Keysignings Linux Cafe | Meeting Notes | Linux Links | Bling | About BLU |
--On Friday, March 22, 2013 1:31 PM -0400 Dan Ritter <dsr at randomstring.org> wrote: > The next best method would be to use a group of DNS servers that > had failover for the service IP address. There's no need for You don't need or want failover for caching name servers. DNS clients have fault tolerance built in. If you have a hot/cold cluster and one node fails then the other node will have an empty cache when it spins up. You also have no DNS at all for however long it takes for the cold node to spin up. If you have a hot/hot pair with no failover then each node will have some cached data. If a node fails then you still have the other node's cache. There is no down time waiting for a cold node to spin up. The DNS clients will automatically rotate through their resolver lists when nodes are unreachable. If you shuffle the resolver lists on each client node then you get the benefits of a load balancer for zero cost. -- Rich P.
BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups | |
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities. |