Synchronous replication as implemented by the SafeKit software is essential for failover of transactional applications. With synchronous replication, all committed data on the disk of the primary server are on the disk of the secondary server. With asynchronous replication, committed data on the disk of the primary server can be lost in case of failure because not copied to the secondary server. There is also an alternative solution named semi-synchronous replication, with committed data on the secondary server but not necessary on its disk.
To help you to take the right decision if you have to choose between synchronous replication vs asynchronous replication, we explain now the technical mechanisms and the impact on application failover.
Synchronous replication
With synchronous replication as implemented by the SafeKit software, when a disk IO is performed by the application or by the file system cache on the primary server, SafeKit waits for the IO acknowledgement from the local disk and from the secondary server, before sending the IO acknowledgement to the application or to the file system cache. This mechanism is essential for failover of transactional applications when they commit their transactions.
Asynchronous replication
With asynchronous replication implemented by most solutions, the IOs are placed in a queue on the primary server but the primary server does not wait for the IO acknowledgments of the secondary server. So, all data that did not have time to be copied across the network on the secondary server is lost if the primary server fails. In particular, a transactional application loses committed transactions in case of failure.
Semi-synchronous replication
With semi-synchronous replication, SafeKit always waits for the acknowledgement of the two servers before sending the acknowledgement to the application or the file system cache. But in the semi-synchronous case, the secondary sends the acknowledgement to the primary upon receipt of the IO and writes to disk after. In the synchronous case, the secondary writes the IO to disk and then sends the acknowledgement to the primary.
Conclusion
With asynchronous replication, there is data loss on failure. Even with the semi-synchronous replication, there is data loss in the special case of a simultaneous double power outage of both servers, with inability to restart on the former primary server and the requirement to re-start on the secondary server. So be very careful when choosing synchronous replication vs asynchronous replication. Always prefer a synchronous or a semi-synchronous replication for a critical application.
A SafeKit cluster runs on Windows and Linux without the need for expensive shared or replicated disk bays
SafeKit includes
all clustering features:
synchronous real-time file replication, monitoring of server/network/software failures, automatic
application
restart, virtual IP address switched in case of failure to reroute clients
This is not the case with replication-only solutions like replication at the database level which implements only replication
The cluster configuration is very simple and made
by means of application modules.
There is no domain controller or active directory to configure as with Microsoft cluster
SafeKit implements quick
application
restart in case of failure: around 1 mn or less (see RTO/RPO here)
Quick
application
restart is not ensured with full virtual machines replication. In case of hypervisor failure, a full VM must be rebooted on a new hypervisor with a recovery time depending on the OS reboot as with VMware HA or Hyper-V cluster
After a failure when a server reboots, the replication failback procedure
is fully automatic and the failed server reintegrates the cluster without stopping
the application
on the only remaining server
This is not the case with most replication solutions particularly with replication at the database level. Manual operations are required for resynchronizing a failed server.
The application
may even be stopped on the only remaining server during the resynchonization of the failed server
All SafeKit clustering features are working for 2 servers in remote sites. Performances of replication depends on the interconnect latency for real-time synchronous replication and on the bandwidth for resynchronizing data on a failed server
If both servers are connected to the same IP network through an extended LAN between two remote sites, the virtual IP address of SafeKit is working with rerouting at level 2
If both servers are connected to two different IP networks between two remote sites, the virtual IP address can be configured at the level of a load balancer.
SafeKit offers a health check: the load balancer is configured with a URL managed by SafeKit which returns OK on the primary server and NOT FOUND else. This solution is implemented for SafeKit in the Cloud but it can be also implemented with a load balancer on premise
The secondary server is not dedicated to the restart of the primary server. The cluster can be active-active by running 2 different mirror modules
This is not the case with a fault-tolerant system where the secondary is dedicated to the execution of the same application synchronized at the instruction level
SafeKit implements a mirror cluster with replication and failover. But it imlements also
a farm cluster with load balancing and failover.
Thus a N-tiers architecture can be made highly available and load balanced with the same solution on
Windows and Linux (same installation, configuration, administration with the SafeKit console or with the command line interface). This is unique on the market
This is not the case with an architecture mixing different technologies for load balancing, replication and failover
Application HA supports hardware failure and software failure with
a quick recovery time
(RTO around 1 mn or less). Smooth upgrade of application and OS possible server by server (version N and N+1 can coexist)
Full virtual machines HA supports only hardware failure with a VM reboot and a recovery time depending on the OS reboot. Smooth upgrade not possible
No dedicated server with SafeKit.
Each server can be the failover server of the other one. Software failure with restart in another OS environment. Smooth upgrade of application and OS possible server by server (version N and N+1 can coexist)
Secondary server dedicated to the execution of the same application synchronized at the instruction level. Software exception on both servers at the same time. Smooth upgrade not possible
No dedicated proxy servers and no special network configuration are required in a SafeKit cluster for virtual IP addresses
Special network configuration is required in other clusters for virtual IP addresses. Note that SafeKit offers a health check adapted to load balancers
SafeKit Modules for Plug&Play High Availability Solutions
Network load balancing and failover: click on the blue buttons
Farm modules
Windows
Linux
New application
IIS
-
Apache
Amazon AWS farm
Microsoft Azure farm
Google GCP farm
Cloud generic farm
Real-time file replication and failover: click on the blue buttons
Mirror modules
Windows
Linux
New application
Microsoft SQL Server
-
Oracle
MySQL
PostgreSQL
Firebird
Hyper-V
-
KVM
-
Docker
-
Elasticsearch
-
Milestone XProtect
-
Hanwha Wisenet SSM
-
Nedap AEOS
-
Amazon AWS mirror
Microsoft Azure mirror
Google GCP mirror
Cloud generic mirror
Demonstrations of SafeKit High Availability Software
SafeKit Webinar
This webinar presents in 10 minutes Evidian SafeKit.
In this webinar, you will understand:
mirror and farm clusters
cost savings against hardware clustering solutions
best use cases
the integration process for a new application
Microsoft SQL Server Cluster
This video shows a mirror module configuration with synchronous real-time replication and failover.
The file replication and the failover are configured for Microsoft SQL Server but it works in the same manner for other databases.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish.AcceptRead More
Privacy Overview
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
A SafeKit cluster runs on Windows and Linux without the need for expensive shared or replicated disk bays
This is not the case with replication-only solutions like replication at the database level which implements only replication
