On Mon, 3 May 2010 22:34:02 -0400 Wes Rogers wrote:
WR> 2010/5/3 Ted Zlatanov :
>> On Mon, 3 May 2010 15:07:43 -0400 Wes Rogers wrote:
>>
WR> Seems like too much effort to me, IMO when I can just add another
WR> 'cfservd server' behind my LB VIP and call it a day.
>>
>> You still need a way t
For us, our policy gets refreshed every hour from SVN on all "servers"
(or whenever manually).
Wes
2010/5/3 Ted Zlatanov :
> On Mon, 3 May 2010 15:07:43 -0400 Wes Rogers wrote:
>
> WR> Seems like too much effort to me, IMO when I can just add another
> WR> 'cfservd server' behind my LB VIP and c
On Mon, 3 May 2010 15:07:43 -0400 Wes Rogers wrote:
WR> Seems like too much effort to me, IMO when I can just add another
WR> 'cfservd server' behind my LB VIP and call it a day.
You still need a way to propagate policy between multiple cfservd
servers. What happens when one of them is offline
Seems like too much effort to me, IMO when I can just add another
'cfservd server' behind my LB VIP and call it a day.
Some organizations which have different groups managing multiple sets
of configs would have a harder time doing that but..
Wes
2010/5/2 Ted Zlatanov :
> On Fri, 30 Apr 2010 11:3
On Fri, 30 Apr 2010 11:30:28 -0500 Paul Krizak wrote:
PK> The main thing I'm asking is if anybody has had any experience scaling
PK> up a cfservd to this much work, and whether or not it fell over.
...
PK> I'm talking about 5,000 systems each updating about 50MB of policy data
PK> over a 1-2 h
