Print

Print


On Tue, 6 Sep 2011, Ernie Buford wrote:

> What services would have been affected by this?  I'm seeing a 
> significantly positive effect of something today.  Copying some folders 
> from local disk to \\zoofiles\public_html was 10 times faster at noon 
> hour today than it was last Friday.

The load balancers would not affect transfers to zoofiles.

There were some significant problems with core routing to the server 
networks last week that might have affected your transfer.

Are things 10x faster than last week, or 10x faster than normal?

(also, is this to your ebuford public_html?)

Mike

> On 9/2/2011 4:31 PM, Benjamin Coddington wrote:
>> We've successfully commissioned the replacement load balancer.  Please let 
>> us know if you are aware of significant issues following this change.
>> 
>> Thanks for bearing with us through this repair.
>> 
>> Ben, and SAA
>> 
>> 
>> On Sep 2, 2011, at 4:03 PM, Benjamin Coddington wrote:
>> 
>>> IT professionals,
>>> 
>>> Yesterday, one of UVM's primary service load balancers failed.  Even 
>>> though the secondary load balancer restored service, certain parts of the 
>>> campus network had disrupted connectivity to some services such as the UVM 
>>> web servers and SMTP.  This was related to a complex layer-2 switching 
>>> problem that is still being investigated.
>>> 
>>> In the meantime, a replacement load balancer has been provisioned as a 
>>> primary, and SAA plans to commission this hardware immediately to mitigate 
>>> our non-redundant configuration.
>>> 
>>> At 4pm or shortly after, we plan to bring up this new hardware.  We don't 
>>> expect further disruption, however there is a very small chance that some 
>>> communication problems may result.
>>> 
>>> Ben
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> Benjamin Coddington
>>> Systems Architecture and Administration
>>> Enterprise Technology Services
>>> University of Vermont
>