PugJr

Uh...*scratch head*...So exactly what would I need to do? Would I buy a piece of hardware that does this or what...?

Just wondering how you would have 1 domain over 2 servers so was wondering if that would work but clearly it does not. Guess thats the next question: How do people have 1 domain with X amount of servers? You could use thorpes idea where you have a computer that always takes the requests and then gives the request to one of his local servers, but what happens if you have 50000 requests a second? Surely that isn't what google is doing.

Yes, I had manually set apache to 5550. Unless somehow my website is working through port 80 when its closed. So its just a typo then without any significance to it?

Oni-kun, why does Apache go to :80? Was that a typo on your side to be intended as :5550? Or is there some significance about being :80? (:80 is blocked in my router.)

Akitchin, would you explain that a bit newbier? I don't really understand what you mean. So are you saying that when a packet is sent to me, the client sends it twice and then it gets split to each server? I'm afraid I don't really understand what you mean. :-\ P.S I wasn't exactly claiming thats what its doing, I just was making a hypothesis thats what it was doing since you guys have been so helpful in saying what could be doing it.

Why is it impossible for the router to send the packets to both 192.168.2.6 and 192.168.2.8? Now if its a WC3 packet and apache gets it, it ignores the packet as its not readable to it, and while if WC3 gets an apache packet, it ignores it? All I see is this: Client connects to my I.P.:PORT, now my router tells 192.168.2.6 AND 192.168.2.8 the same identical packet. Each server responds on it if it can properly read the packet. If it can't, it doesn't, if it can, it does. Nothing is techincally impossible in this case, but I'm not even sure if thats what its doing. I suppose I could prove it with packet logger and see if both servers get packets which only one is supposed to get.

Don't know whats there to see, but okay. As you can see, both have the same port, just different computers. WC3 being the computer game, Server being Apache.

Thats a good idea, thorpe, but still not my original question answered. I can run the same exact port and I.P. on 2 different servers and somehow both properly work which is Apache for one server and a computer game server for the other (So don't tell me its impossible to use the same port and I.P. for the 2 different servers). Now how do you figure that this can happen since they are the same IP:PORT? So would it have to be that the router sends packets to both of the servers under the same port?

I have two servers running with the same exact port AND I.P. Unless I'm misunderstanding what you guys are saying? This might raise a question why I'm asking this if I have already tested it and see that it somehow works, but one was running a computer game server with the same port and the other was Apache running the same port. But what if they are both Apache? Although now you bring it up, oni-kun, I'm a bit confused on how its working because how can it identify which packet goes to which computer if they are the same exact IP:Port?

They can't have the same lan I.P. but internet I.P. they surely can. For instance, I have two computers, one is 192.168.1.1 and the other 192.168.1.2 both are under the same exact internet I.P. and port. Which one would reply to the clients request or both?

Lets say I have two servers both with the same I.P. and both the default HTTP port both hosting Apache. A client makes a request. What happens? Is it whichever is higher up on the router that they are both connected to or would they possibly both respond or what?

http://aboutonlinetips.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/product-key.png And don't you mean DVD-key? .. If you truly didn't (may be inside package, sticker on back, sticker on case, or separate in manual) then call up microsoft and give them the serial number on the package, and they should give you a key after the proof you purchased it and it will activate as normally intended. I got a 2-cd package closed saying it contains Windows 7 but after reading the cover, it says you need an XP or Vista CD-Key to use it. So whats that about? Or does Windows 7 share keys?

By the way, when you installed your Windows 7, did you get a CD-Key? I have Ultimate and Professional DVD but it didn't come with a cd key.

Funny, due to incompatiability (OMG TYPO) issues, I've went from XP to Vista. Then I went from Vista to Vista. Have you had any problems when upgrading? Its awful. All your registeries are screwed up because they are made for XP, not Vista. All drivers must be re-installed due to it being Vista instead of XP, and in which case you have to delete all the old drivers, but some old ones wouldn't get deleted due to mis-registry problems and many other problems persisted. XP to Vista through upgrade isn't worth a damn. Is XP to 7 any better?

Something tells me you got a crap video card if you bought one without a new motherboard because any new video card uses PCI 2.0 and older motherboards do not have that slot. If anything, you have the standard AGP/PCI (Not 2.0) motherboard?

Well he is living the life of his game, being an e-gangsta and what not with his copyright breaking!

Any chance this popular site was PHPFreaks?

You could always just back up all your data somewhere and then once you reformat it, put it back.

I've only tried DSL and Ubuntu server. DSL was really slow (Like 30 seconds to do anything) but it was being emulated through windows. I like the ubuntu server OS, but wouldn't have it for a personal computer.

I wasn't sure as it seemed like he might have been pointing out something other than a lack of indents. Maybe he was saying having a loop in a loop is bad. It just seems that if thats his point, he wouldn't have included the loops.

Besides having wrong syntax (Lacking a "}" at the end) what exactly is the reason you do not like that or is wrong to do in programming?

http://www.phpfreaks.com/ has 1,000,000 posts!!!! (Well almost, but I wanted to be the topic creator for 1m posts and by the time I logged in again someone else would have already made it so...) Woohoo. 1m is a big number! Congratz PHPFreaks! :intoxicated: :birthday:

I'm afraid if someone is stupid enough to be running non-server software on their server (Eg. IE) then its ultimately their fault and not IEs (Still IEs fault for being exploitable, but not for a server being hacked). Maybe I'm hosting my server wrong because I do not have IE or any browser in that case running. So lets say this hack problem can hack my personal computer. Okay so I lost my personal computer but how in the world is having an IE exploit going to somehow magically transfer from my personal computer to my server computer when it doesn't even have IE installed? I suppose the IE exploit could install a hacking device on my personal computer and then my personal computer hacks my server computer, but thats still saying my server was insecure in the first place to be hacked, not the IE exploit. I honestly don't understand how google got hacked. So like people are all using IE in Google HQ and every single computer is connected to the google server?

So which character with the SarcMark replace in windows XP/Vista/7? Or will it being using more than a 1 byte character?

Although I've never tried hosting AMP on a Windows Server, only a windows home edition, it was much slower when accsessing harddrive which ultimately means a slower mysql. Also with Ubuntu Server I was able to obtain 512 MB more RAM. For some reason Windows didn't like my use of a third ram slot for whatever reason but Windows Server may have fixed these problems I've mentioned. I managed to reformat from Windows to Ubuntu 9.10 server and having it working which took me a Saturday and Sunday. Although I can't vouch that Linux or Windows is more secure than the other as my Windows server (Not server OS but treated as one) was only hosted locally and my Linux one is on the web but nothing has happened to it as of yet. Also, my Ubuntu server has yet to crash a single time. Personally if you have a DVD writer and a spare DVD writable, I'd go with Linux. (Ubuntu for the newbies, aka myself. )