load balancing again

Merton Campbell Crockett m.c.crockett at adelphia.net
Tue Feb 28 03:31:09 UTC 2006

On 27 Feb 2006, at 17:43 PST, Kevin Darcy wrote:

>> I don't know if the results are "balanced" - they are,
>> however, "different" every time :-) . I suppose for truly random load
>> balancing, or for balancing based on some other performance metric,
>> you will need a specialized balancer.
> Um, no, an rrset-order of "random" works fine, if randomization is  
> what
> you want (well, I guess the "fine"ness of the randomization would be
> limited by the quality of the PRNG on your particular platform, but
> let's not split hairs). Of course, randomization can lead to
> unpredictable traffic "spikes", but then that's the nature of the  
> beast,
> not something to be blamed on BIND.

Aren't "traffic spikes" just a "fact of life"?

BIND can only exert some control over the sequence in which the name  
servers are listed when a system requests NS records directly from  
your server.  Once the list has been delivered to another name server  
or a client system, the decision of how the list will be used is  
based on that name server's or client system's strategy for using the  
list of name servers.

Merton Campbell Crockett
m.c.crockett at adelphia.net

More information about the bind-users mailing list