Skip to main content
commvault.com commvault.com

Hi guys,

We are planning to set up LiveSync and our Web Server is installed on the primary CommServe Instance001. I assume that if we don’t separate the Web Server, we will only be able to operate from the CommCell if a failover occurs (since LiveSync works at the SQL Server agent level). I did not see in the documentation that having a seperate Web Server was a requirement for LiveSync and I was wondering if it was absolutely necessary or if it would be a better practice to set it up as a separate server.

Thanks for your help!

It depends 😃

I believe in using a seperate webserver, one address, no invalid sessions due to failover, no management when a failover took place.

Config/install is a bit more then just next next finish but I believe it's worth it.

But if you use

  • a floating hostname, or
  • a load balancer with sticky session functionality

You can use a webserver on the commserve. You still encounter session issues as the webserver goes offline during a commserve failover.

You could also simply connect to the address of the new active commerve, but that's not very user friendly.

Let me know your thoughts/questions on the matter 😉

 

Also for reference on the concept as where the webserver is installed separately from the commserve nodes.

Here is a post for the general setup I advice to use:

And here is a post for the additional webserver SQL related setup I advice to use:

 

Thanks for your input @Jos Meijer . Since we have an Extra Large environement I will suggest my team to follow your first advice and have a seperate Web Server, especially if we can encounter session issues when the failover occurs. And it seems a more “state-of-the-art” approach, not as much fuss when a server goes down... and I don’t mind a little extra testing to set it up.

Thanks again! I will read your other posts.

No problem @LukeBrett 

Let me know if you or the team have any questions 🙂

Thanks for your input @Jos Meijer . Since we have an Extra Large environement I will suggest my team to follow your first advice and have a seperate Web Server, especially if we can encounter session issues when the failover occurs. And it seems a more “state-of-the-art” approach, not as much fuss when a server goes down... and I don’t mind a little extra testing to set it up.

Thanks again! I will read your other posts.

Hey @LukeBrett , I was the one asking the question! 😉 Thanks for answering (we’re in the same team 🙂 ).

Haha I figured that you were colleagues 😋

Your very welcome @JayBR 👍👍

Reply


Terms & ConditionsCookie settings