# Tag provider redundancy **URL:** \ **Category:** Ignition\ **Created:** [November 10, 2024, 8:07pm UTC](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/tag-provider-redundancy/98446 "2024-11-10T20:07:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 9\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Mohammed\_Afthab](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b5a626/32.png) [@Mohammed\_Afthab](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/u/Mohammed_Afthab)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2024, 8:07pm UTC](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/tag-provider-redundancy/98446/1 "2024-11-10T20:07:47Z")
HI Is it possible to set up redundancy for the tag provider? We have two independent regional stations, each with a redundant gateway polling data from field devices. Now, we want a central station to pull data from the regional redundant gateways using a remote tag provider. However, in Ignition, we're limited to specifying only one tag provider. Is there a way to add redundancy for the tag provider? Thanks in advance. ---
**Author:** ![pturmel](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/inductiveautomation/user_avatar/forum.inductiveautomation.com/pturmel/32/3295_2.png) [@pturmel](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/u/pturmel)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2024, 8:57pm UTC](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/tag-provider-redundancy/98446/2 "2024-11-10T20:57:12Z")
IIRC, when a remote tag provider points at a redundant pair, and those redundant gateways both have paths back through the GAN, then the RTP will natively source from the active gateway of the pair. ---
**Author:** ![Mohammed\_Afthab](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b5a626/32.png) [@Mohammed\_Afthab](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/u/Mohammed_Afthab)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2024, 6:36am UTC](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/tag-provider-redundancy/98446/3 "2024-11-13T06:36:53Z")
But here we have 2 redundant pair, total 4 gateway , to one big central Ignition (redundant again) ---
**Author:** ![pascal.fragnoud](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/inductiveautomation/user_avatar/forum.inductiveautomation.com/pascal.fragnoud/32/24728_2.png) [@pascal.fragnoud](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/u/pascal.fragnoud)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2024, 9:59am UTC](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/tag-provider-redundancy/98446/4 "2024-11-13T09:59:37Z")
You should probably have 2 remote tag providers, each pointing at a provider from a redundant pair. ---
**Author:** ![Mohammed\_Afthab](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b5a626/32.png) [@Mohammed\_Afthab](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/u/Mohammed_Afthab)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2024, 7:28pm UTC](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/tag-provider-redundancy/98446/5 "2024-11-13T19:28:15Z")
The issue is that both The challenge is that both redundant pairs are polling the same devices. I need to retrieve data for a tag from only one of the redundant pairs at any given time. ---
**Author:** ![pturmel](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/inductiveautomation/user_avatar/forum.inductiveautomation.com/pturmel/32/3295_2.png) [@pturmel](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/u/pturmel)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2024, 7:57pm UTC](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/tag-provider-redundancy/98446/6 "2024-11-13T19:57:43Z")
> [@Mohammed\_Afthab](#): > > both redundant pairs are polling the same devices Really? > [@Mohammed\_Afthab](#): > > only one of the redundant pairs at any given time. There's nothing in Ignition to help you do this. (Sounds insane to me.) ---
**Author:** ![pascal.fragnoud](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/inductiveautomation/user_avatar/forum.inductiveautomation.com/pascal.fragnoud/32/24728_2.png) [@pascal.fragnoud](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/u/pascal.fragnoud)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2024, 9:00pm UTC](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/tag-provider-redundancy/98446/7 "2024-11-13T21:00:33Z")
Why not poll those devices on a common tag provider ? ---
**Author:** ![michael.flagler](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/inductiveautomation/user_avatar/forum.inductiveautomation.com/michael.flagler/32/26272_2.png) [@michael.flagler](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/u/michael.flagler)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2024, 10:51pm UTC](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/tag-provider-redundancy/98446/8 "2024-11-13T22:51:04Z")
This seems like overkill. Are you trying to solve the problem of losing a network connection to one of the redundant pairs? Regional to me means that each of those redundant pairs should only be polling a limited number of devices in their respective regions. Then you would connect those to your central gateway to combine regions. If you're trying to have those redundant, and if you have a decent network connection between the 2 regions, you're probably better off setting up a single redundant pair spanning across those 2 regions so that only 1 server is polling the devices. The problem you'll have then though is that if your connection is lost to the primary but if the primary can see the secondary just fine, then it won't fail over. ---
**Author:** ![Mohammed\_Afthab](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b5a626/32.png) [@Mohammed\_Afthab](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/u/Mohammed_Afthab)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2024, 4:58am UTC](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/tag-provider-redundancy/98446/9 "2024-11-14T04:58:33Z")
Thank you, everyone. Yes, it’s a highly redundant setup, and we’re aiming to establish two control centers to address potential station blackouts or environmental concerns. As Michael suggested, we plan to place the primary control center in one region and the secondary in another, with high availability for virtual machines at each station.