Search Results

Search found 50074 results on 2003 pages for 'web servers'.

Page 633/2003 | < Previous Page | 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640  | Next Page >

  • PostgreSQL failover cluster on Windows Server

    - by user36997
    We are looking for advice on how to setup a basic failover cluster for our application: We will be using 4 machines running Microsoft Windows Server (most probably 2003). All four will always run our application, which is essentially a web service. Load balancing is "outsourced" - somebody else handles the distribution of the web requests among the servers. Only one of the servers will be running the PostgreSQL server actively at any given time. Another server (of the four) also has the DB installed, but is on standby/passive. The DB data is stored on shared storage. No copying data between servers. Reads are done very frequently by many end-users, and in rather small chunks of data. Writes are done much less frequently, by less users, and in very large bulks of data. Now, how can one configure Microsoft Cluster Service to keep only one instance of the DB server and 4 instances (1 per server) of our application at all times? And does PostgreSQL integrate neatly with MSCS at all? Update: Instead of keeping the data on shared storage, I also consider using log shipping to replicate data on a couple of DB servers. There are two issues with this option: Log shipping only makes sure that I have a second server that gets all of the data and is ready to take over. How do I implement the actual failure detection and failover switch? Switching back: Suppose the master fails and the system automatically fails over to the slave, and later the master comes back online. I understand that with WAL shipping this will require to reconfigure the log shipping once again, and that switching back is far from seamless. Is that so?

    Read the article

  • Getting started with webserver clustering.

    - by Ernie
    I work for a small ISP, and we host about 250 domains and all the stuff that goes along with that: DNS, mail, spam filtering, and backups. Currently, we have separate DNS servers (two of them) and mail servers (outgoing mail is actually on the secondary DNS server, but was previously on its own server). In the past, this was done as an insurance measure. The last thing we need is for some doofus (usually yours truly) to hose a server, taking out DNS and mail right along with it, or for spammers to jam our incoming SMTP server, preventing outgoing mail from being sent too. In the past, this was a problem, and our servers were set up the way they are now to combat it. However, clustering solutions like Sun's Cobalt RAQ (in days of olde) and Virtualmin appear to cater to an all-in-one approach, then deal with failures through redundant servers. I have avoided this thus far, but we've been using Virtualmin on our web server for a while now, and I'd like to expand into using it for a high availability cluster. Our networking partner has recently built a datacenter that has eliminated all of our other bugaboos like network, cooling, and power issues, so now the only thing left to go wrong is me hosing a server, which happened earlier this month. One of the bigger reasons we've avoided going this route is because our hardware requirements aren't particularly high. One server easily handles all the sites we host (most of them are flat sites). Also, load-balancing routers tend to be expensive and complicated. All that I'm really expecting to do is building a two-node cluster for redundancy so that when I hose a server (however rare that might be), we're not out for 8-12 hours while I rebuild it. What I need to know is how to get started, and if I'm really in a position to bother with this kind of thing at all.

    Read the article

  • Avoiding DNS timeouts when a dns server fails

    - by Neil Katin
    We have a small datacenter with about a hundred hosts pointing to 3 internal dns servers (bind 9). Our problem comes when one of the internal dns servers becomes unavailable. At that point all the clients that point to that server start performing very slowly. The problem seems to be that the stock linux resolver doesn't really have the concept of "failing over" to a different dns server. You can adjust the timeout and number of retries it uses, (and set rotate so it will work through the list), but no matter what settings one uses our services perform much more slowly if a primary dns server becomes unavailable. At the moment this is one of the largest sources of service disruptions for us. My ideal answer would be something like "RTFM: tweak /etc/resolv.conf like this...", but if that's an option I haven't seen it. I was wondering how other folks handled this issue? I can see 3 possible types of solutions: Use linux-ha/Pacemaker and failover ips (so the dns IP VIPs are "always" available). Alas, we don't have a good fencing infrastructure, and without fencing pacemaker doesn't work very well (in my experience Pacemaker lowers availability without fencing). Run a local dns server on each node, and have resolv.conf point to localhost. This would work, but it would give us a lot more services to monitor and manage. Run a local cache on each node. Folks seem to consider nscd "broken", but dnrd seems to have the right feature set: it marks dns servers as up or down, and won't use 'down' dns servers. Any-casting seems to work only at the ip routing level, and depends on route updates for server failure. Multi-casting seemed like it would be a perfect answer, but bind does not support broadcasting or multi-casting, and the docs I could find seem to suggest that multicast dns is more aimed at service discovery and auto-configuration rather than regular dns resolving. Am I missing an obvious solution?

    Read the article

  • Proper Network Infastructure Setup DMZ, VPN, Routing Hardware Question

    - by NickToyota
    Greetings Server Fault Universe, So here's a quick background. Two weeks ago I started a new position as the systems administrator for an expanding health services company of just over 100 persons. The individual I was replacing left the company with little to no notice. Basically, I have inherited a network of one main HQ (where I am situated) which has existed for over 10 years, with five smaller offices (less than 20 persons). I am trying to make sense of the current setup. The network at the HQ includes: Linksys RV082 Router providing internet access for employees and site to site VPN connecting the smaller offices (using an RV042 each). We have both cable and dsl lines connected to balance traffic (however this does not work at all and is not my main concern right now). Cisco Ironport appliance. This is the main gateway for our incoming and outgoing emails. This also has an external IP and internal IP. Lotus domino in and out email servers connected to the mentioned Cisco gateway. These also have an external IP and internal IP. Two windows 2003 and 2008 boxes running as domain controllers with DNS of course. These also have both an external IP and internal IP. Website and web mail servers also on both external and internal IPs. I am still confused as why there are so many servers connected directly to the internet. I am seriously looking to redesign this setup with proper security practices in mind (my highest concern) and am in need of a proper firewall setup for the external/internal servers along with a VPN solution about 50 employees. Budget is not a concern as I have been given some flexibility to purchase necessary solutions. I have been told Cisco ASA appliance may help. Does anyone out in the Server Fault Universe have some recommendations? Thank you all in advance.

    Read the article

  • Map FTP folder to folder on different FTP server

    - by jolt
    In my team we work a lot with FTP. We upload and download files from several different servers daily. Currently every member of the team manages access credentials to each FTP server locally on their own machine. I am looking for a way to set up a central FTP server that we can connect to, and from there, navigate to folders that each represent one of the other FTP servers that we connect to daily. Something like this: In-house central FTP server: |- FolderA --> server A root folder |- FolderB --> server B root folder |- FolderC --> server C root folder A setup like this, would mean that we can manage access credentials on the central FTP server, and team members would only need to have the access credentials to the central FTP server, and from there they could navigate to the other servers through these "virtual" folders. We could potentially develop our own custom FTP server that just forward requests to the remote FTP servers, but i feel like something like this (or something similar) would already have been done. So I'm looking for pointers that could help us find software for Windows that could help us to simplify our current setup. Thank you! Similar (unanswered) question here: FTP management server

    Read the article

  • OpenSwan (IPSEC) on Fedora 13 with Snow Leopard as a client

    - by sicn
    I recently installed OpenSwan on my Fedora 13 machine. I want to use it to connect with Mac OS X with L2TP over IPSEC, unfortunately I am already stuck on the IPSEC-negotation part. My server is running behind a NATted firewall so my external IP differs from the server's IP. The server has a fixed IP on the network and the same is almost always valid for the clients (they are usually behind a NATted firewall). I installed OpenSwan on Fedora 13 and have following configuration: config setup protostack=netkey nat_traversal=yes virtual_private=%v4:10.0.0.0/8,%v4:192.168.0.0/16,%v4:172.16.0.0/12 oe=off nhelpers=0 conn L2TP-PSK-NAT rightsubnet=vhost:%priv also=L2TP-PSK-noNAT conn L2TP-PSK-noNAT authby=secret pfs=no auto=add keyingtries=3 rekey=no ikelifetime=8h keylife=1h type=transport left=my.servers.external.ip leftprotoport=17/1701 right=%any rightprotoport=17/0 IPSEC starts fine and listens to UDP 500 and 4500. These two ports are opened in the firewall and are forwarded fine to the server. In my /etc/ipsec.secrets file I have my.servers.external.ip %any: "LongAndDifficultPassword" And finally in my sysctl.conf (the redirect-entries are there because OpenSwan was strongly protesting about send/accept_redirects being active) I have net.ipv4.ip_forward = 1 net.ipv4.conf.all.send_redirects = 0 net.ipv4.conf.all.accept_redirects = 0 Running "ipsec verify" gives me "all greens" (except Opportunistic Encryption Support, which is DISABLED), however, when trying to connect my Mac gives me following in the logs: Nov 1 19:30:28 macbook pppd[4904]: pppd 2.4.2 (Apple version 412.3) started by user, uid 1011 Nov 1 19:30:28 macbook pppd[4904]: L2TP connecting to server 'my.servers.ip.address' (my.servers.ip.address)... Nov 1 19:30:28 macbook pppd[4904]: IPSec connection started Nov 1 19:30:28 macbook racoon[4905]: Connecting. Nov 1 19:30:28 macbook racoon[4905]: IKE Packet: transmit success. (Initiator, Main-Mode message 1). Nov 1 19:30:31 macbook racoon[4905]: IKE Packet: transmit success. (Phase1 Retransmit). Nov 1 19:30:38: --- last message repeated 2 times --- Nov 1 19:30:38 macbook pppd[4904]: IPSec connection failed Any ideas at all?

    Read the article

  • What permission(s) does an application pool identity required to manage other application pools?

    - by Mr Shoubs
    I have a web site (used to manage various parts of our software) that needs the permissions required to start/stop other application pools. I've created a user and set the app pool identity to custom, however the web app still can't start/stop the app pools. I get the following Error: System.UnauthorizedAccessException: Filename: redirection.config Error: Cannot read configuration file due to insufficient permissions at Microsoft.Web.Administration.Interop.AppHostWritableAdminManager.GetAdminSection(String bstrSectionName, String bstrSectionPath) at Microsoft.Web.Administration.Configuration.GetSectionInternal(ConfigurationSection section, String sectionPath, String locationPath) at Microsoft.Web.Administration.ServerManager.get_ApplicationPoolsSection() at Microsoft.Web.Administration.ServerManager.get_ApplicationPools() Discussion here suggests setting the application pool to local system or administrator, this does work, but I don't want to do this for security reasons (external support will need access this site). I did give the user higher permissions (as suggested here), starting by making it part of the local administrators group, but initially this didn't work, and giving the user read/write/mod permission on C:\Windows\System32\inetsrv\config also didn't work. I must have done something wrong as local administrator now works, however this still isn't what I want. So can anyone suggest the permissions I need to add to this user, and how can I apply them? An answer my problem (but different question) is here, but to clarify, I think I need to give an individual user "IIS Runtime Operation Permissions", does anyone know how to do this, if indeed this is the permissions I require?

    Read the article

  • Wrong Outlook anywhere settings

    - by Ken Guru
    Hey all I wanted to enable NTLM authentication on OutlookAnywhere, and after doing the command Set-OutlookAnywhere -IISAuthenticationMethods Basic,NTLM, my settings got changed. This is a dump before I run the command: [PS] C:\Windows\system32Get-OutlookAnywhere ServerName : EXCAS01 SSLOffloading : False ExternalHostname : ClientAuthenticationMethod : Basic IISAuthenticationMethods : {Basic} MetabasePath : IIS:///W3SVC/1/ROOT/Rpc Path : C:\Windows\System32\RpcProxy Server : EXCAS01 AdminDisplayName : ExchangeVersion : 0.1 (8.0.535.0) Name : Rpc (Default Web Site) DistinguishedName : CN=Rpc (Default Web Site),CN=HTTP,CN=Protocols,CN= EXCAS01,CN=Servers,CN=Exchange Administrative Grou p (FYDIBOHF23SPDLT),CN=Administrative Groups,CN=Fi rst Organization,CN=Microsoft Exchange,CN=Services ,CN=Configuration,DC=asp,DC=ssc,DC=no Identity : EXCAS01\Rpc (Default Web Site) Guid : 289b4865-caf1-4412-95ee-6fb0dff55e8b ObjectCategory : asp.ssc.no/Configuration/Schema/ms-Exch-Rpc-Http-V irtual-Directory ObjectClass : {top, msExchVirtualDirectory, msExchRpcHttpVirtual Directory} WhenChanged : 05.01.2011 16:59:55 WhenCreated : 27.11.2009 11:20:12 OriginatingServer : IsValid : True Noticde the settings for "Name", "DistinguishedName", and "Identity". After I run the command, I ended up with this: [PS] C:\Windows\system32Get-OutlookAnywhere ServerName : EXCAS01 SSLOffloading : False ExternalHostname : ClientAuthenticationMethod : Basic IISAuthenticationMethods : {Basic, Ntlm} MetabasePath : IIS:///W3SVC/1/ROOT/Rpc Path : C:\Windows\System32\RpcProxy Server : EXCAS01 AdminDisplayName : ExchangeVersion : 0.1 (8.0.535.0) Name : EXCAS01 DistinguishedName : CN=EXCAS01,CN=HTTP,CN=Protocols,CN=EXCAS01,CN=Serv ers,CN=Exchange Administrative Group (FYDIBOHF23SP DLT),CN=Administrative Groups,CN=First Organizatio n,CN=Microsoft Exchange,CN=Services,CN=Configurati on,DC=asp,DC=ssc,DC=no Identity : EXCAS01\EXCAS01 Guid : 289b4865-caf1-4412-95ee-6fb0dff55e8b ObjectCategory : asp.ssc.no/Configuration/Schema/ms-Exch-Rpc-Http-V irtual-Directory ObjectClass : {top, msExchVirtualDirectory, msExchRpcHttpVirtual Directory} WhenChanged : 06.01.2011 09:43:50 WhenCreated : 27.11.2009 11:20:12 OriginatingServer : ASP-DC-2. IsValid : True Now, the "Name", "DistinguishedName" and "Identity" has changed, and when I try to change it back by running "Set-OutlookAnywhere -Identity "EXCAS01\Rpc (Default Web Site)", I get the following error: [PS] C:\Windows\system32Set-OutlookAnywhere -Identity "EXCAS01\Rpc (Default Web Site)" Set-OutlookAnywhere : The operation could not be performed because object 'EXCA S01\Rpc (Default Web Site)' could not be found on domain controller 'ASP-DC-2.'. Remember, the RPC over HTTP works fine with Basic authentication (even with the wrong settings), but NTLM still doesnt work. How do I change back the settings?

    Read the article

  • Struggling to set-up NLB cluster

    - by Chris W
    I'm trying to set up NLB on a couple of Windows 2008 R2 virtual servers running on top of Hyper V R2. The servers each have a single vNIC for LAN access (and a second vNIC for SAN access). I'm setting up the cluster to use Multicast mode. The vNICs are each set to allow MAC spoofing. Essentially I'm finding that i can add SERVER1 as a host and it will pick up and respond to the cluster IP from a remote subnet. If I then 'stop' the node in NLB manager it still responds when I would expect it to stop answering on that IP. If I recreate the cluster and add SERVER2 as the first host, the wizard completes correctly and an IPCONFIG on the server shows that it now has the cluster IP but I can't ping the cluster IP from a remote subnet but I can from another machine on the same subnet. As a final test - with both servers in the cluster, pinging from another machine on the same subnet I still get a response from the cluster IP when both nodes are stopped according to the NLB manager. The two VMs are sat on the same physical blade and are built up exactly the same as they'll be used as SharePoint web front end servers. I'm at a loss as to what could be wrong with the second VM that prevents it taking on the address just as the sole node in the cluster, never mind the strange behaviour of the cluster when I stop/start nodes.

    Read the article

  • IIS 7.5 FTP Service crashes after installation of Advanced Logging 1.0 Module

    - by Jeremy
    I've recently been tasked with setting up two new productions servers for an ASP.Net application. The servers sit behind a F5 Load Balancer, which in turn forwards the end users IP address forward via the standard X_Forwarded_For HTTP Header. All of the reading that I have done suggests that I need to install the IIS Advanced Logging Module in order to take advantage of the X_Forwarded_For HTTP Header. Some quick background: Both of the web servers are Windows 2008 R2 Standard (x64), with IIS 7.5 installed and configured. The FTP Role has also been installed, configured and is operational. The Issue After installing the IIS Advanced Logging module via the Web Platform Installer, I noticed the following Error in the Event Viewer: The FTP Service encountered an error trying to read configuration data from file \?\C:\Windows\system32\inetsrv\config\applicationHost.config, line number 374. The error message is: Unrecognized element 'advancedLogging' Trying to connect over FTP to either of the web servers results in a 530. I've spent 2 hours scouring Google trying to find a solution, short of uninstalling the Advanced Logging Module. As far as I can tell, there is no way to turn off Advanced Logging on a site per site basis. Help would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Performance monitoring on Linux/Unix

    - by ervingsb
    I run a few Windows servers and (Debian and Ubuntu) Linux and AIX servers. I would like to continously monitor performance on these systems in order to easily identify bottlenecks as well as to have an overview of the general activity on the servers. On Windows, I use Windows Performance Monitor (perfmon) for this. I set up these counters: For bottlenecks: Processor utilization : System\Processor Queue Length Memory utilization : Memory\Pages Input/Sec Disk Utilization : PhysicalDisk\Current Disk Queue Length\driveletter Network problems: Network Interface\Output Queue Length\nic name For general activity: Processor utilization : Processor\% Processor Time_Total Memory utilization : Process\Working Set_Total (or per specific process) Memory utilization : Memory\Available MBytes Disk Utilization : PhysicalDisk\Bytes/sec_Total (or per process) Network Utilization : Network Interface\Bytes Total/Sec\nic name (More information on the choice of these counters on: http://itcookbook.net/blog/windows-perfmon-top-ten-counters ) This works really well. It allows me to look in one place and identify most common bottlenecks. So my question is, how can I do something equivalent (or just very similar) on Linux servers? I have looked a bit on nmon (http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/aix/library/au-analyze_aix/) which is a free performance monitoring tool developed for AIX but also availble for Linux. However, I am not sure if nmon allows me to set up the above counters. Maybe it is because Linux and AIX does not allow monitoring these exact same measures. Is so, which ones should I choose and why? If nmon is not the tool to use for this, then what do you recommend?

    Read the article

  • Router recommendation to virtualize 800 IPs

    - by delerious010
    I've recently been looking at getting some new load balancers for our environment as we are expecting to double our client base in the next 12 months. Currently we have 400 public IPS serving 800 clusters ( 2 clusters / IP due to ports ) on Coyote Point Balancers, and distributing connections to 3 web servers serving about 6GBytes outgoing, 2Gbytes in per day. If we double, this would be about 800 IPs, possibly 1600 clusters, and about 6 servers per cluster ( for a total of 9600 so called "real servers" using Barracuda's lingo ). Due to the amount of clusters, most solutions I've looked at ( Coyote, Barracuda, Loadbalancer.org ) seem to be unsure whether they'll be able to handle our planned growth, mostly due to health checks performed on the servers ... which makes total sense when you think of it. So the fine folk at loadbalancer.org recommended that we may be better off offload the 400-800 public IPs, which we require for SSL eCommerce solutions, over to a forward facing router. From that point on, the router could do some mangling to route EXT_IP:443 to INT_IP:INT_PORT which would then allow us to reduce the Load Balancer configuration to 1 or 2 clusters, thus resolving the health check problem. Does this idea make sense to yall ? Or would you have other recommendations to make ? Secondly, what router would you recommend for such an undertaking ? I'd be looking at something that has some form of failover mechanism built in. On a totally unrelated note, I've got to admit that I'm extremely pleased with the responses I got from loadbalancer.org. Their responses to my inquiries were surprisingly helpful ( i.e. I didn't feel as if I was taking to a sales guy trying to push something ). ( No I don't work for them, and sadly nor are they sending me free gear ).

    Read the article

  • How do I force a server to leave a SharePoint farm

    - by Stefan
    I have two web servers in a SharePoint (WSS 3.0) farm with one database server for the config and content databases. I already moved my content databases to a new database server successfully. But when I tried to move the sharepoint config database using the "stsadm deleteconfigdb" and "stsadm setconfigdb" commands, one of my servers got stuck in an intermediate state. I was able to join one of the web servers with the config database on the new server, but the other server is not able to join because it believes it is already part of the farm (which it used to be, before the move). On the central administration it says the status of the services on the server is "stopping". Even after rebooting all servers involved, uninstalling SharePoint and what not, this status does not change, and because of it, I am not able to join the second server with the new config database. I get random error messages when trying to join the farm. I believe that if I can unstuck this server, it will be able to join the farm again. The farm believes the second server is already part of it, but the web server itself knows its not. Any ideas on how to forcefully kick out a server from the farm?

    Read the article

  • Exchange 2010 Hub cannot deliver to Exchange 2007 Hub - "451 5.7.3 Cannot achieve Exchange Server authentication"

    - by Graeme Donaldson
    We have an existing Exchange 2007 server in Site A (exch07). I've installed an Exchange 2010 server in Site B (exch10). Both servers have the CAS, Mailbox and Hub roles. Messages sent via SMTP on exch10 which are destined for mailboxes on exch07 are queued with the "Last Error" reported in Queue Viewer as '451 4.4.0 Primary target IP address responded with: "451 5.7.3 Cannot achieve Exchange Server authentication." Attempted failover to alternate host, but that did not succeed. Either there are no alternate hosts, or delivery failed to all alternate hosts.' I've found that some people have resolved this by creating new Receive Connectors which are scoped specifically to apply to connections from the remote hub/s, but I have had no luck doing this. Specifically I created new receive connectors on both servers with the following settings: Remote IP = IP/s of remote server Authentication = "Transport Layer Security (TLS)" and "Exchange Server authentication" Permission Groups = "Exchange servers" and "Legacy Exchange Servers" This made no difference, I see the same error message. What am I missing? Update: We noticed that the Application log had this error message from MSExchangeTransportService: Microsoft Exchange could not find a certificate that contains the domain name exch07.domain.local in the personal store on the local computer. Therefore, it is unable to support the STARTTLS SMTP verb for the connector exch10 with a FQDN parameter of exch07.domain.local. If the connector's FQDN is not specified, the computer's FQDN is used. Verify the connector configuration and the installed certificates to make sure that there is a certificate with a domain name for that FQDN. If this certificate exists, run Enable-ExchangeCertificate -Services SMTP to make sure that the Microsoft Exchange Transport service has access to the certificate key. It turns out that the default self-signed certificate was no longer enabled for the SMTP service for some reason. After enabling the self-signed certificate for SMTP, we no longer get the error in the event logs, but delivery is still failing with the same error message. Update 2: I put a mailbox on exch10 and attempted to deliver a message via SMTP on exch07 and I get the same error.

    Read the article

  • Shared firewall or multiple client specific firewalls?

    - by Tauren
    I'm trying to determine if I can use a single firewall for my entire network, including customer servers, or if each customer should have their own firewall. I've found that many hosting companies require each client with a cluster of servers to have their own firewall. If you need a web node and a database node, you also have to get a firewall, and pay another monthly fee for it. I have colo space with several KVM virtualization servers hosting VPS services to many different customers. Each KVM host is running a software iptables firewall that only allows specific ports to be accessed on each VPS. I can control which ports any given VPS has open, allowing a web VPS to be accessed from anywhere on ports 80 and 443, but blocking a database VPS completely to the outside and only allowing a certain other VPS to access it. The configuration works well for my current needs. Note that there is not a hardware firewall protecting the virtualization hosts in place at this time. However, the KVM hosts only have port 22 open, are running nothing except KVM and SSH, and even port 22 cannot be accessed except for inside the netblock. I'm looking at possibly rethinking my network now that I have a client who needs to transition from a single VPS onto two dedicated servers (one web and one DB). A different customer already has a single dedicated server that is not behind any firewall except iptables running on the system. Should I require that each dedicated server customer have their own dedicated firewall? Or can I utilize a single network-wide firewall for multiple customer clusters? I'm familiar with iptables, and am currently thinking I'll use it for any firewalls/routers that I need. But I don't necessarily want to use up 1U of space in my rack for each firewall, nor the power consumption each firewall server will take. So I'm considering a hardware firewall. Any suggestions on what is a good approach?

    Read the article

  • DNS-Based Environment Determination

    - by zvolkov
    Found the following here. The questions is: where can I find more details on how exactly implement this on Windows? Any guide or how-to anybody? Or maybe you can provide your invaluable suggestions? Specifically, how do I make so that "all QA servers would first resolve entries in qa.example.com first and then if that lookup failed they would try example.com" (I'm a dev, not a DNS specialist, but our IT Support has refused to help on this:() Use DNS Based Environment Determination for your servers. Do this by initially splitting your top level domain into a number of sub domains depending on their function, and then creating DNS Service Names in each of the sub domains pointing to the relevant server for that service. Based on the list above we would then have: * clientdb.prod.example.com for Production * clientdb.perf.example.com for Performance Testing * clientdb.qa.example.com for QA * clientdb.dev.example.com for Development Servers then resolve entries in their relevant sub domain by function. That is, all QA servers would first resolve entries in qa.example.com first and then if that lookup failed they would try example.com. This allows you to have a single configuration entry for your client database hostname (clientdb) that would resolve correctly in all environments. This technique has the added advantage of still having global services defined in a common top level domain. This seems to be related to Providing "split horizon" DNS service. Reading that, I see that I will probably need separate DNS Server for each environment. Is this true or does Windows support some form of "tagging" the records to be visible depending on the requestor's IP?

    Read the article

  • Unable to logon using terminal server connection

    - by satch
    I have several W2K3 SP2 servers, admin TS enabled. I discovered this morning, I was unable to logon into some of them. I've a couple of Citrix servers in different farms, a SAP (IA64) app server and a cvs server. All of them show same sympthoms; remote connections are refused. I've been able to logon locally, and terminal server service is up, there are no users (so connections are not depleted). There are no errors in log in most servers. One of the Citrix ones, reported following errors: Event ID 50 Source TermDD Type Error Description The RDP protocol component X.224 detected an error in the protocol stream and has disconnected the client. and Event ID 1006 Source TermService Type Error Description The terminal server received large number of incomplete connections. The system may be under attack. Anyway, I suppose these errors appear because server isn't working, and Citrix users try to logon massively. (I nmap'ed server and port seems up). I've solved this problem rebooting before, but with so many servers affected it seems like a crappy workaround. Any idea about troubleshooting it properly? Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • 403 with Apache and Symfony on Ubuntu 10.04

    - by Dominic Santos
    I'm trying to run symfony on my apache installation (I'm using xampp for the whole package) and it keeps giving me a 403 error every time I try to access my website. I've got vhosts set up with the following: <VirtualHost *:80> ServerName localhost DocumentRoot "/opt/lampp/htdocs" DirectoryIndex index.php <Directory "/opt/lampp/htdocs"> AllowOverride All Allow from All </Directory> </VirtualHost> <VirtualHost *:80> ServerName servername.localhost DocumentRoot /home/me/web/server/web DirectoryIndex index.php Alias /sf "/lib/vendor/symfony/data/bin/web/sf" <Directory "/home/me/web/server/web"> AllowOverride All Allow from All </Directory> </VirtualHost> <Directory "/lib/vendor/symfony/data/bin/web/sf"> Allow from All </Directory> I've also added "127.0.0.1 servername.localhost" in my hosts file. When I try to access "servername.localhost" it just gives me a 403 error. I've chmod'd 777 the symfony directory and my website directory in my home directory and used './symfony project:permissions' to let symfony check that permissions are set up correctly but still not result. If I move my website directory into "/opt/lampp/htdocs" then it will serve it from there but still has problems access the symfony stuff such as the debug toolbar. Any help would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • IIS SSL is taking all IPs although it is told not to

    - by Martin Sall
    I have a testing system where IIS Express on Windows 7 SSL website has to live together with Cerberus FTP server SSL website (Cerberus FTP has a built-in web server for HTTP uploads). I have set up Windows to use two IPs from my router 192.168.1.128 (for IIS SSL Web Site, using a self-generated SSL certificate for now) 192.168.1.129 (for Cerberus FTP built-in SSL Web Site) In IIS I have set web site binding to use only the IP 192.168.1.128. But still when I launch Cerberus, it says - cannot bind 192.168.1.129:443. I tested in Firefox - indeed, when I go to 192.168.1.129 (or even localhost), I do not get “Unable to connect“ page as expected, but “The connection was reset” instead. IIS is still occupying those IPs, although it is not serving the website on those IPs. When I stop the IIS website, Cerberus FTP Website launches without problems. But then I cannot launch IIS web site, it tells - "The process cannot access the file because it is being used by another process". Why is IIS SSL web site still occupying all IPs?

    Read the article

  • Changing Corosync/Heartbeat pair's active node based on MySQL/Galera cluster state

    - by Hace
    Background I'm planning on building a High Availability "cluster" for our Zabbix instance by placing two physical servers in one server room and two in another server room. In each server room one of the physical servers will run Zabbix on RHEL and the other will run Zabbix's MySQL database, also on RHEL. I'd prefer synchronous replication for the MySQL nodes so I'm planning on using Galera in a master-slave configuration. The Zabbix instances on the two Zabbix servers would be controlled by Heartbeat/Corosync (although Red Hat Cluster Suite is also an option...) If the Zabbix server in Server Room A goes down, the one in Server Room B becomes active (and vice versa). Ditto for the MySQL servers/instances. If either of those cases happen, however, the connection between the Zabbix server and the MySQL server becomes significantly slower as ti has to travel over WAN. Question Is it possible to configure the Heartbeat/CoroSync pair to instruct the MySQL/Galera cluster to change the master node to switch to (if available) the one that's in the server room as the active Heartbeat/Corosync -node and (more challengingly) is it possible to do the same in the other direction, i.e have the Galera cluster change the active Heartbeat/CoroSync server to be in the same room as the active MySQL master server in case of a failover in over to avoid unnecessary WAN transfers between the application and its DB? Theories Most likely I can get CoroSync to run something that'd log in to one of the DB nodes to change the MySQL/Galera master but I don't know if it's really possible to do anything similar in the other direction in Galera. Is it possible to define a "service" in CoroSync/Heartbeat so that both the service and its MySQL service would migrate as one if possible. Using the DB server that's behind WAN should still be a better option to DB downtime. Am I just using too many tools to solve a problem that'd be far simpler with something else?

    Read the article

  • Route through site-to-site VPN not working

    - by Jonathan
    I'm trying to set up a site-to-site VPN using RRAS on two 2K8r2 servers since yesterday. The connection is working at this point, but I can't get it to send traffic from one site to the other one. Set up: the set up is the same on both sites: the server is connected to a router that's connected to a modem. The routers act like a DHCP-server and assign IP addresses from the range subnet.21-subnet-.100. Both servers use a static IP address, subnet.11, and are set up as DMZ. Configuration: the servers are configured using the wizard to set up a site-to-site connection. This works with a demand-dial interface and a PPTP VPN connection. As mentioned, the VPN connection work properly. Problem: I can't get the servers to send the traffic for the other site, to be sent through the VPN connection. I added a static route on both server (home, office 1) and I can see the result in the IP routing table (home, office 1). I did this because the route didn't show up automatically. My guess is that this last step isn't right, for example because the routing table states "non demand-dial", which seems not correct. Home: Subnet: 10.0.1.0/24 Router: 10.0.1.1 Server: 10.0.1.11 (DMZ) DHCP: 10.0.1.21-10.0.1.100 RRAS DHCP: 10.0.1.101-10.0.1.150 Office 1: Subnet: 10.0.2.0/24 Router: 10.0.2.1 Server: 10.0.2.11 (DMZ) DHCP: 10.0.2.21-10.0.2.100 RRAS DHCP: 10.0.2.101-10.0.2.150 I hope someone has an idea to get this route working!

    Read the article

  • IIS 7.5 stops serving requests for no apparent reason

    - by Steffen
    We're running a site on 4 virtual Win 2008 R2 64 bit servers. This is the only site on the IIS, and we use Windows Network Load Balancing to share the load between our 4 virtual servers. We've used these virtual servers for approximately a week, and we're starting to see some issues. For no apparent reason the IIS stops serving pages, and doesn't even respond with an error. So upon requesting a page from the server, the browser just waits infinitely (or until it decides to give up clientside) Sometimes an iisreset fixes the issue, other times we have to reboot the entire virtual server. There are no traces in the eventlog of why this happens, and there's no traces in our applications exception log neither. Furthermore this happens even when there's a very small load on the server, so it doesn't seem to be because it's flooded with requests. So frankly I'm at a loss here - I have no idea where to start debugging this issue :-( I'm quite certain we never had these issues on our physical servers, however they were running Win 2003 32bit, so there are quite a few differences between them and the virtual ones. (Which obviously makes it difficult to tell what exactly causes this)

    Read the article

  • What is the best way to create a failover cluster for my IIS website?

    - by ObligatoryMoniker
    Our eCommerce website www.tervis.com currently runs on two servers: SQL server: 2005 x 86 on Windows Server 2003 Standard x86 with a single dual core processor and 4 gb of memeory IIS server: Windows Server 2008 Web edition x64 with dual quad core hyper threaded processors and 32 gb of memory Tervis.com's revenue has steadily grown to the point where we need to have redundant servers deployed with a fail over mechanism so that we do not have any down time. Because the SQL server is so underpowered compared to the web server my thought was to purchase: 2 x SQL Server 2008 R2 web edition x64 single processor license 2 x Windows Server 2008 R2 Web Edition Licenses 1 x New Physical dual quad core 32 GB server 1 x F5 Load Balancer I need the Windows Server 2008 R2 Web Edition licenses so that I can run SQL and IIS on the same box for both of these servers. The thought is to run this as an active/passive fail over cluster that could be upgraded to an active/active cluster if we purchased the additional SQL licensing. The F5 load balancer would serve as the device that monitors the two servers and if the current active one stops responding then fails over to using the other server. To be clear this is not windows clustering but simply using a load balancer to fail over between two computers so that you now have a cluster in the general sense. Is this really the best way to accomplish what I need? Is there some way to leverage the old server 2003 SQL server to function as the devices that funnels http requests to the appropriate active server and then fails over if a problem occurs? Is there any third party clustering software that might help me accomplish this in a simpler fashion?

    Read the article

  • What are the most important aspects to consider when choosing a SAN for a small office virtualizatio

    - by Prof. Moriarty
    I am in the process of consolidating 6 physical servers running 6 different operating system flavors (don't ask) into two identical physical servers (Dell PowerEdge 2900), using the free VMware ESXi 4.0 platform. We will install an iSCSI SAN over a 1GbE network, and store all virtual machine images on the SAN. Each physical server would run 3 VMs, and in the case of a physical server failure, we would manually switch over the other 3. These are all internal servers, while important, they can tolerate some amount of downtime (say <1h) to keep cost and complexity associated with HA down. I now need to choose the SAN to be used for the setup, on a low budget. We currently have about 2TB of data, but of course I want to able to grow, do backups of VM snapshots on other drives and remove them to a different location, etc. So what I would like to know is: Which are the must have features for this setup, without which using a SAN is not worth it? We are mostly a Dell shop, so I have been looking at the EqualLogic PS4000E High Availability model. Any opinions, anecdotes, bad experiences with this model? (This is one of the few models which could accomodate our existing disks from the physical servers.) If you can recommend something that is not Dell, but it has better value, I would most definitely consider it. Caveats, things to look out for?

    Read the article

  • will heavy network traffic affect other connections on HP ProCurve V1810-48G?

    - by nn4l
    I have a HP ProCurve V1810-48G switch with a few servers connected to it (everything in one rack). The switch is practically in its default configuration. During copying of a few hundred GByte of data from server_a to server_b (using tar cf - data | ssh server_b 'cd myhome; tar xf -'), essentially saturating the network capacity between those two servers, I noticed network related error messages on the console of server_c - as if server_c is no longer able to send/receive traffic to server_d. After canceling the copy command everything was normal again. I would understand this if the network connection would use a shared resource, for example if server_a and server_c are in one datacenter, server_b and server_d are in another datacenter and both datacenters are connected with a 100 MBit line. But all of the mentioned servers are connected to the same switch and are located in the same IP network. I always thought that a connection between two servers on one switch will not affect any other server connected to the switch. It is also possible that the network related error messages are caused by something else - but I can't risk a network problem for any other system on this switch. Please advise.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640  | Next Page >