Failover on a large DHCP system
Nicholas F Miller
Nicholas.Miller at Colorado.EDU
Fri May 8 17:00:33 UTC 2009
> On Fri, May 08, 2009 at 10:09:29AM -0600, Nicholas F Miller wrote:
> > With constant restarts of DHCP and the need for
> > failover to redistribute the pools on restarts I think the server
> load and
> > disk access would be too high.
>
> The disk access footprint between failover restarts is only the
> "changes" to the database. It doesn't remirror the lease db every
> reconnect - they only update each other with any new bindings that
> ocurred during the blackout.
>
> With huge numbers of leases, it can be a problem however, as it causes
> both servers to traverse the entire lease database (in memory) right
> now.
With around 72,000 leases at any given time and 677 pools, should we
just continue using our current restart methodology or try to
implement omshell as a way to add/remove the hosts? Since omshell
writes its changes to the leases file, the changes will survive a
restart, ignoring the config. This could lead to some interesting
troubleshooting if something were to go awry.
_________________________________________________________
Nicholas Miller, ITS, University of Colorado at Boulder
More information about the dhcp-users
mailing list