[wpkg-users] load balancing

[Peter Gough]

Do them on the weekend and claim the overtime ;-)

2009/7/28 Rainer Meier <r.meier at wpkg.org>

> Hi,
>
> Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
> > I did some experiments with multicasting (copy the file to the local
> > machine using multicast), but it didn't work reliably and setup was
> > complicated.
> >
> > In reality, it perhaps makes sense to split the configuration into
> > logical groups (rooms, floors etc.) - and deploy one after another
> > (Monday - rooms 1xx, 2xx, Tuesday - 3xx etc.).
> > This also prevents you from simple mistakes to some extent: if you made
> > a package which doesn't start (i.e. uninstalls the old version, but
> > doesn't install a new version, leaving you with no software installed),
> > not all users will be affected.
>
> I fully agree to the proposal and would like to add another possibility. If
> you
> frequently need to deploy this amount of data it might even make sense to
> add
> more servers to deploy the software. So groups of clients could access
> their own
> local WPKG server. In easiest case even a workgroup NAS in an office could
> serve
> local clients while WPKG updates are pushed using rsync or similar.
>
> However I don't recommend this approach for large enterprises. It's more
> suitable for small or medium sized companies with multiple locations where
> remote traffic to the central server should be avoided.
>
> So if your 1500 clients are on the same site as the server adding multiple
> profiles to segment the roll-out looks suitable. The easiest way to achieve
> this
> might be to duplicate your WPKG installation into multiple directories and
> having each group of clients pointing to another installation. Just
> creating
> multiple profiles is usually not enough since a package can by definition
> exist
> only once in the package tree - so as soon as you update it all clients
> referring to this package (no matter from which profile) will trigger an
> update.
>
>
> Alternatively deploying more server power (load-balancers etc.) seems to me
> it
> could be overkill since upgrading large packages like OOo is not an
> every-day task.
>
> Another possibility which comes to my mind is: Why not running the upgrade
> manually to spread the load?
> Larger enterprises (like yours seem to be) quite often use hardware which
> supports WoL (Wake On LAN). So just wake up the machines at midnight and
> let
> them deploy the software. If you can't reach a few of them it does not
> matter a
> lot because the remaining ones would not overload your server in the
> morning.
> On clients which are already running you might remotely run the WPKG
> service to
> initiate the deployment.
>
> Hopefully this gives some hints.
>
>
> br,
> Rainer
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> wpkg-users mailing list archives >>
> http://lists.wpkg.org/pipermail/wpkg-users/
> _______________________________________________
> wpkg-users mailing list
> wpkg-users at lists.wpkg.org
> http://lists.wpkg.org/mailman/listinfo/wpkg-users
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wpkg.org/pipermail/wpkg-users/attachments/20090728/26b42562/attachment-0002.html>