This is a discussion on Re: DNS Failover - DNS ; My apologies for being lazy with my hits-per-day stats. I just pulled the actual info for that web site on last Monday, and it received 11.3 million hits that day. So it really isn't that the site gets a proportionately ...
My apologies for being lazy with my hits-per-day stats. I just pulled the actual info for that web site on last Monday, and it received 11.3 million hits that day. So it really isn't that the site gets a proportionately high number of unique hits. The low TTL method of failing over is working for us very well for a number of different web sites, but I think this one is a good example.
However, I wonder whether it is considered inconsiderate behavior to set very low TTL values, and thus increase the burden for resolvers? We have several records with a 30s TTL, and three with 10s. Those are the lowest.
On Thu, Oct 14, at 01:35%P so wrote Maria Iano (firstname.lastname@example.org):
> I think you may have misread my message. The stat for hits was per day, but the unique visitors stat was per month. The particular site I mentioned contains information and entertainment spread amongst different pages, and clients tend to stay on the site and travel around the different pages for quite a while.
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On
> > Behalf Of David Botham
> > Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2004 1:19 PM
> > To: email@example.com
> > Subject: Re: DNS Failover
> > firstname.lastname@example.org wrote on 10/14/2004 12:40:24 PM:
> > > Pete,
> > >
> > > It is still the case that our GSLBs work pretty well. I'm not just
> > saying that
> > > from the point of view of using my own browser. When we use the GSLBs
> > to
> > > redirect traffic for our sites, we can see that the traffic does
> > indeed
> > get redirected.
> > >
> > > For example, one of our sites gets over a million hits per day from
> > all
> > over
> > > the world. It gets over one million monthly unique visitors. When the
> > IP
> > To Pete's point: As your hits are coming from a large number of unique
> > hits, that implies unique brower sessions, and therefore implies that
> > that
> > your users will not have cached information from your glsb's and this
> > type
> > of traffic might not be problematic.
> > However, the ones you have to worry about are those people that are not
> > unique and have a browser cached answer. These people will have the
> > problem that Pete describes.
> > With the large number of unique connections your site takes you can
> > expect
> > to see the results you have described. As will all technical caveats,
> > it
> > is important to evaluate your particular circumstances and determine the
> > potential impact to your situation.
> > Just my $.02.
> > Thank,
> > Dave...
> > > address handed out for that site by the GSLBs is changed, the change
> > takes
> > > effect in the traffic to the site extremely quickly and effectively.
> > So
> > that
> > > gives a good kind of average over the various different browsers and
> > resolvers
> > > throughout the world.
> > >
> > [clip...]