Forum Moderators: phranque
we have been having major problems with our hosting company and are going to move.
The head of IT here wants to have a sort of redirect from our current host, to the new host, which, if it was down, would redirect it to another host which would have a copy of the site.
So in effect, we are using the current host to direct us to either the new host A, or host B, if host A is down.
I hope this makes a little sense to someone.
Would we get a duplicate content penalty (any penalty for that matter) for the site being on 2 different hosts, but only using the 2nd host if the 1st was down?
Any help much appreciated.
briggidere
So in effect, we are using the current host to direct us to either the new host A, or host B, if host A is down.I hope this makes a little sense to someone.
Not really :-)
What happens if the current host goes down? You don't get a redirect to either new host A or host B?
I also think what you need is a new host for server A. For most of us a reliable host is easier and better than the setup I think you're trying to attain. The setup you're looking at I'd consider to be 'enterprise class'. For most of us, finding a host that has basically 100% uptime is the way to go.
It's my guess that there are only a small handful of hosters out there that work at this level. Very small. If you try to skimp or save x dollars a month, you will get what you deserve. Good hosters run their own datacenters, they don't outsource support, they aren't cheap, and they don't go down.
another question if i may be so cheeky,
you mentioned,
"I *think* what you need instead is some sort of DNS (name server) setup that tests if server A is down. If not, it points to server A. If it does seem to be down then it points all traffic to server B. The nameservers of course would not be located where server A or server B are. "
would this have any implications on the way the search engines would see the site, or have any possible penalties?
cheers
would this have any implications on the way the search engines would see the site, or have any possible penalties?
No. The reason Wheel correctly points you to a DNS solution is because all that would be happening behind the scenes is a change of IP address - something that the SE's handle pretty well.
They do cache IP's, but you would presumably be aiming to get the failed machine back up and running as soon as practically possible anyway.
Would we get a duplicate content penalty
No - there is no duplicate content as long as you only use one domain name, and point it at either one machine or the other's IP address.
This is a standard load-balancing tactic. Some DNS services actually provide such a fail-safe anyway*, so I don't think you'd require the "third man" PC in front of the 2 main web servers. You either use a load-balancer or some form of dynamic DNS service.
While I tend to subscribe also to Wheels advice of "just get a decent host in the first place", especially for a small site, I think there is a time and a place for multiple "cheap" machines coupled to load-balancing and redundancy. Google is a good example of that in practice.
TJ
* - see sticky
thanks for all the help guys.
a problem shared in here is a problem sorted.
cheers
