This archive contains answers to questions sent to Unidata support through mid-2025. Note that the archive is no longer being updated. We provide the archive for reference; many of the answers presented here remain technically correct, even if somewhat outdated. For the most up-to-date information on the use of NSF Unidata software and data services, please consult the Software Documentation first.
Hi Art, Sorry for the slow response... re: > Good news... our department has given approval for Penn State to act as a > top-tier feed for CONDUIT data! If that's still the direction Unidata > wishes to take, I'm ready to move forward with configuration changes. Excellent! > I have a question about failover/redundancy... in my current LDM relay > LVS cluster I use one of my three relays as the data ingester. To provide > for redundancy, however, a second relay is configured to feed from this > primary ingester as a primary feed, but then also lists all the remote > feed sources as alternates. In the case where the main ingestor goes > down, this secondary ingestor automatically continues ingesting data from > the remote sites to continue operation. The third relay feeds from the > first two relays as primary and alternate. > > This seems like a pretty good arrangement to me but it has a down side... > the secondary ingester seems to flip-flop between feeding from our local > primary ingester and the remote feed sites, which adds some level of > additional load to our networks and the remote feed systems. Are you concerned about the duplication of traffic when the secondary ingester is feeding from a remote (i.e., non-PSU) site? For reference, the 2 accumulator machines for our IDD relay cluster redundantly request all feeds possible from two or more upstream sites. We force those connections to all be primary by making sure that the requested feed patterns are treated as being different (i.e., one will use ".*" while the other will use "(.*)"; these are equivalent by are seen as being different by the LDM code that sets primary/secondary feed status). > My concern > is how I would implement such a redundant arrangement if we connect direct > to NCEP since they only allow four top-tier connections whereas our > primary/secondary ingesters would both be trying to feed from them at > various times in the above configuration. Can you think of a better way > to do this? I would have your secondary ingester point at a non-NCEP machine like idd.cise-nsf.gov. Cheers, Tom -- **************************************************************************** Unidata User Support UCAR Unidata Program (303) 497-8642 P.O. Box 3000 address@hidden Boulder, CO 80307 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Unidata HomePage http://www.unidata.ucar.edu **************************************************************************** Ticket Details =================== Ticket ID: NLC-477499 Department: Support IDD Priority: Normal Status: Open