3 ms·
Maybe I don't see the use case since I'm not at that scale, but it seems like a lot of added complexity for what appears to be hacking around using other load b
by llama052 8y ago
Maybe I don't see the use case since I'm not at that scale, but it seems like a lot of added complexity for what appears to be hacking around using other load balancing solutions as a Layer-4 option?
Edit: It's a question, if you downvote please let me know why it's a better solution.
- vbernat 8y agoThe goal is to avoid disruption during topology changes. If you have long-lived connections, this is important to keep them alive. The explain this a bit more here: https://github.com/github/glb-director/blob/master/docs/development/second-chance-design.md#comparison-to-lvs-and-other-director-state-solutions https://github.com/github/glb-director/blob/master/docs/deve... I have also written about this in a past article: https://vincent.bernat.im/en/blog/2018-multi-tier-loadbalancer https://vincent.bernat.im/en/blog/2018-multi-tier-loadbalanc... (which may or may not be easier to understand)
- ngrilly 8y agoI read your link, and it's easy to understand because it's really well explained :-)