
Confession: I’m a grown man, but I can’t change a tire. I’ve been on many, many road trips, and I feel ashamed as I’m writing this, but oh well, I’m going to learn ASAP (pinky promise!). You may be wondering why I’m talking about road trips and tires.
Well, you can think of failover as a spare tire. It’s a backup system that helps keep you going if your main system “goes flat.”
I’m not one for big introductions, so let’s keep things short and sweet. If I’ve piqued your interest, read on to traverse the 16-lane highway of failover knowledge with me (I’m all about speed and efficiency).
And don’t worry, we’ll have several pit stops!
-
Navigate This Article:
The Basics of Failover
If you run a business where even a few hours of server downtime could lead to substantial losses (financial and reputational), it makes sense to spend money on a physical or cloud-based failover server.
And failover systems aren’t limited to servers. You can implement a failover solution for software applications, network connections, and equipment.

Basically, if you want to keep things up and running even if there’s a problem, you need to invest in failover solutions (how else do you think businesses guarantee near 100% service uptime?).
I’ll talk more about the different types of failover solutions soon.
Understanding the Concept
For now, I’m going to explore the basics of failover. Let’s say you run a budding eCommerce business and have (cleverly) invested in a cloud-based failover server. This failover server is configured with the same apps and data, and it continuously monitors the health of your primary server.
If your primary server fails, the failover server takes over in a heartbeat, ensuring high availability and lightning-quick recovery.
Components of Failover
Calling the primary system (like your eCommerce server) a mere “component” of failover is an injustice. It’s the very foundation on which failover strategies are built. I’ll make things easier to understand, though, so without further ado, here are the components of failover:
- Primary System: It’s a bird! It’s a plane! No, it’s the main system in use.
- Standby System: The backup or secondary system — ready to take over when the primary system fails. This just gave me supersub vibes (it’s a cricket term; Google it).
- Heartbeat Monitoring: The process that constantly checks the health of the primary system with a virtual stethoscope.
Events like hardware failure, software crashes, or network issues could trigger a failover.
Make sure to configure your network and application monitoring tools to send an automated alert when the failover solution is activated!
Types of Failover Systems
You have a headstart on this section: I’ve flirted with the types of failover systems already, and as promised, it’s time for a deeper dive. Here are the four types of failover systems:
- Hardware Failover: When a physical component, like your server or hard drive, fails, a backup component takes over automatically.
- Software Failover: If an app crashes or has issues, a backup version of it takes over.
- Network Failover: When network infrastructure (i.e. your router) fails, the backup router takes over, ensuring network traffic flow is maintained. Network failover also includes network connections, like your internet connection.
- Cloud Failover: If a cloud service, like your cloud storage provider, has an outage, a backup in a different cloud will keep you in business.
Mind you, cloud failover and cloud-based failover solutions are two different things (I talked about investing in a cloud-based failover server for your business earlier). Don’t worry, I’ve dedicated an entire section to comparing the differences.
Active-Active vs. Active-Passive Failover
If you’re a true businessperson, you may already be considering how to maximize the potential of failover solutions. Why let the failover solution remain idle while the primary system is doing all the work? Sharing is caring, after all.
Your perspective aligns with the concept of active-active failover. And hey, this doesn’t mean active-passive failover (where the failover solution is idle) should be overlooked.
Active-Active Failover

Let’s revisit the eCommerce example. Instead of running your eCommerce website on a single server, server “A,” you can handle user requests on both server “A” and “B” by using a load balancer to evenly distribute incoming traffic.
If one server fails, the load balancer will automatically reroute all traffic to the other server. On the downside, active-active failover setups are more complex to configure, more expensive to operate, and can pose data consistency challenges.
Active-Passive Failover

If you want to define a clear failover strategy, have budget constraints, and don’t mind occasional downtime (I advise you to proceed only if you tick all three boxes), an active-passive failover setup may be fine.
But keep in mind the failover system will remain idle until a failover occurs. And I hate the thought of inefficient resource utilization. While I may sound passive-aggressive, both setups have their merits. Choose wisely.
Failover Methods and Techniques
Manual failover and automatic failover are the two methods for handling failover situations from which you must choose. I strongly recommend automatic failover, as it responds more quickly to failures, minimizes downtime, and reduces reliance on an operator you’d need to hire for the transition.
You’ll still need to hire someone to set up automatic failover anyway, but the likelihood of errors is lower.
Manual Failover
Manual failover is more common in active-passive failover setups (quite obviously). While it offers greater control over the failover process and allows you to assess the situation before switching to the backup system, I wonder if it’s truly necessary.
In other words, if you have system monitoring tools in place, they could automatically report the details of the situation to you while the backup system is already operational — your customers would appreciate the time saved.
Automatic Failover
You already know what automatic failover is, so I won’t waste your time with another definition. After all, your time is just as valuable as that of your customers! Automatic failover has its fair share of disadvantages, chief among them being that it can be difficult to configure.
If you don’t implement it correctly, you risk encountering false positives. This shouldn’t be a problem in active-active setups, but in an active-passive setup, you could be in for a ride!
Stateful vs. Stateless Failover
Now that you understand failover methods, let’s explore the techniques for managing application states and user sessions during the failover process. In stateful failover, the backup system picks up right where the primary system left off — your users won’t even notice the transition.
On the other hand, a stateless transition can impact your users by requiring them to reauthenticate or restart processes. This happens because the backup system isn’t obliged to retain the primary system’s state. As you may have guessed, stateless transitions are more popular in active-passive setups.
Key Failover Mechanisms
You now have a good understanding of how failover works, along with the key methods and techniques involved. However, to get a crystal-clear picture, you’re still missing some important details. Namely, how exactly is traffic rerouted from an active system to a passive one in the event of failure?
This is where failover mechanisms like load balancers, clustering, and heartbeat protocols come into the picture.
Clustering
If you replace “server” with “node” in the previous section, you’ll have a solid understanding of how clustering works in active-passive failover. The only difference is there’s no “promotion” involved — when the active node fails, the passive node is promoted to active status (this reminds me of Eder’s role in Portugal’s 2016 Euros win).
Taking a broader view, if one node in a cluster of nodes fails (as in active-active failover), the others will seamlessly take over its responsibilities (just another day in corporate life).
Load Balancers
Let’s take the example of an active-passive setup for more clarity on load balancers. The load balancer is responsible for directing traffic to the primary server while the passive one remains on standby.

The passive server is only called into action if the primary one fails (the load balancer learns of this through health checks). In this case, the load balancer will reroute all incoming traffic from your users to the passive server.
And of course, a load balancer is effective in manual and automatic failover configurations (automatic failover for the win).
Heartbeat Protocols
For starters, I love how aptly heartbeat protocols are named — they literally monitor the heartbeat signal of systems!
While clustering solutions typically use heartbeat protocols to monitor the health of nodes, load balancers often rely on their own health check mechanisms. The goal is the same: to maintain high-availability environments.
I’d also like to add heartbeat protocols are generally more reliable, and some advanced load balancers do integrate them.
Failover in Databases
You never know when things may go wrong, so it’s essential to take all necessary steps to ensure your data remains safe. From customer and employee information to product and financial data, databases store just about everything — you can’t afford to lose this data.
Failover in databases is all about keeping data available when disaster strikes. And remember, it’s only a disaster if you haven’t implemented robust replication strategies. Also, be sure to maintain regular backups.
High Availability Clustering
It doesn’t take a genius to understand what high availability clustering is (I’ve already talked about it at length). I recommend maintaining a complete copy of the database in each node (database server) so that the takeover process isn’t riddled with issues. After all, you don’t want to risk partial data loss, right?
Database Replication
Speaking of replication strategies, that’s literally what database replication is all about — maintaining multiple copies of the same database across multiple servers. I prefer synchronous replication, as data is written to both the active and passive (replica) servers at the same time.

Asynchronous replication, on the other hand, could lead to data loss if the active server fails before the data is replicated to the passive server (do the math).
Failover With NoSQL Databases
Have you heard of NoSQL databases? If you haven’t, it’s time to sharpen your knowledge! NoSQL databases are more flexible than traditional relational databases and often include built-in failover solutions (for context, MySQL and PostgreSQL don’t provide automatic failover out of the box).
They use techniques like sharding (where shards are pieces of a database) and replication (replicas for each shard) to make sure your data is distributed across multiple nodes.
Cloud-Based Failover Solutions
From delivering your favorite Netflix shows to storing important documents like your résumé and grandma’s secret recipes (KFC, who?), the cloud finds applications just about everywhere! Cloud-based failover solutions are the answer to all your troubles.
To put it into perspective, if you choose to invest in redundant hardware, infrastructure, and software instances, you’ll face higher operational costs, complex management, and potentially slower response times. Go the cloud way.
Cloud Failover Strategies
If you believe you shouldn’t put all your eggs in one basket, opting for a cloud failover strategy is a wise choice. For example, if one of your physical servers fails, cascading failures could lead to the failure of other servers in your network as well. While this isn’t guaranteed, it’s a possibility.
I recommend using cloud infrastructure for automatic failover across regions or availability zones.
Amazon Web Services (AWS), Google Cloud, and Microsoft Azure offer fantastic multi-region deployment strategies, so be sure to explore those options.
Load Balancing in the Cloud
The major cloud providers don’t offer specific cloud failover strategies. Rather, they provide various services you can use to build your own failover strategy, with load balancing being a key component.
For instance, AWS offers Elastic Load Balancer (ELB) to effortlessly distribute traffic across multiple on-premises and cloud instances while performing system health checks.
Similarly, Google Cloud provides Google Cloud Load Balancing and Azure offers Azure Load Balancer.
Disaster Recovery as a Service (DRaaS)
If you don’t have the time, energy, or resources to draft a comprehensive cloud failover strategy from scratch, you can opt for a prebuilt solution. Disaster Recovery as a Service (DRaaS) provides cloud-based, out-of-the-box solutions that enable you to quickly recover and restore operations without the need for a robust physical disaster recovery site.
Challenges and Best Practices in Implementing Failover
An active-active failover setup looks great on paper, but boy, if you think it’s going to be easy to configure it, think again. This doesn’t mean you have to settle for an active-passive failover setup. While it’s often easier to implement, you could face significant challenges while configuring it.
You see, you have to work hard for the good things in life, so wipe away those beads of sweat on your forehead — I’ve got your back. Let’s explore the challenges you may face in implementing failover and how you can avoid them.
Challenges in Failover Configuration
Implementing a failover system is costly, but that’s not the only challenge you may face. Can you imagine the amount of work you’ll have to put in to integrate its various components into your existing system, especially in active-active setups?
While you can somewhat avert these issues by going the cloud way, you may still find it difficult to integrate with cloud services, especially if they use different architectures of protocols.
Trust me, I’m not trying to scare you away — you’ll thank me later.
Here are some of the challenges you’re likely to face in failover configuration:
- Cost: Setting up a basic redundant system might cost you between $5,000 to $20,000. A more comprehensive setup may reach up to $100,000. If you choose a cloud-based failover solution, you might have to spend between $100 to $5,000 per month. Yes, failover systems aren’t cheap to set up and maintain.
- Complexity: Simply put, you need to make sure everything works together smoothly. If even a single bolt is out of place during a failover event (that’s an exaggeration of course), you could be in for a long night.
- False Failovers: Unnecessary failovers due to incorrect failure detection could cause you serious problems, such as increased downtime, data integrity issues, and operational confusion. Remember, all bolts need to be in place.
This is just the tip of the iceberg. You could also face issues like data inconsistencies and resource misallocations.
Best Practices for Effective Failover
Now that you’re aware of these challenges, I can help you better prepare for and address potential issues when implementing a failover system. Chin up — this is the fun part!
Here are the best practices for effective failover:
- Regular Testing: Regularly test your failover systems through simulations to ensure they work as expected.
- Monitoring and Alerts: It’s better to be safe than sorry, so set up robust monitoring systems to detect issues before they lead to failover. Money talks, my friend.
- Documentation: Write down all procedures and configurations for both manual and automatic failover scenarios. You can think of it as a blueprint for failover.
- Geo-Redundancy: Last but not least, diversify your assets — distribute your resources across multiple geographic locations to ensure resilience.
Last of all, I suggest you train your team to help prevent mistakes during a crisis. All team members should know how to use the failover system.
Failover vs. Failback
Do you know what the opposite of “sit” is? If you guessed “stand,” you’re right. To be honest, I’d have accepted “lie down” as well! Failback is essentially the opposite of failover. Intrigued? Keep scrolling.
Once a failover event has been resolved, you might think it’s time to open a bottle of champagne and take the rest of the day off, right?
While I certainly would, you don’t have the luxury to do so just yet — you still need to return operations to the original primary system (in the case of an active-passive failover setup) or instance (in the case of an active-active failover setup). This is what failback is all about.
After you’ve evaluated the health of the original primary system or instance and given it a thumbs up, you can activate failback. Make sure to integrate all data to maintain data integrity and gradually redirect traffic from the failover system.
Treat the system like a critical patient — monitor it closely and take note of any issues. Once you’ve validated that everything is back on track, document the failback process. You can now enjoy a glass of champagne.
When to Initiate Failback:
Don’t rush the failback process. Only switch back to the primary system or instance if it has been stable for a significant period and all apps and services on it are functioning smoothly. Redo all necessary tests just to be safe. The last thing you need is another failover!
Failover: The Spare Tire Your System Needs
I’m going to try to avoid using flowery failover terms in this section. Let me put it simply: If you’re in it for the long haul (and I hope you are), you need to support your business with all your might.
Unlike a road trip, your business has no destination — your goal is to continue winning in this neverending race and avoid potholes along the way. If one of your tires falls victim to a devious pothole, you must have a spare tire ready in the trunk.
If you don’t, others will overtake you, and your journey may come to a halt (man, I have an eye for drama!). While I’ve been passionately advocating for active-active failover, active-passive failover is a fair choice. In either case, your system needs a spare tire. And hey, if a reasonable opportunity presents itself, step on the gas and overtake the pesky vehicle in front of you!
Drive safely, my friend.