LVS
lvs-users
Google
 
Web LinuxVirtualServer.org

Re: Set --weight 0 to quiescent Server won't work under trafic ???

To: Joachim Wolff <jwolff@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Set --weight 0 to quiescent Server won't work under trafic ???
Cc: "lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Joseph Mack <mack@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 12:30:29 -0400 (EDT)
On Wed, 30 Aug 2000, Joachim Wolff wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> i try to test LVS / ipvsadm since a few days.
> 
> I send requests with http_load to the virtual IP-adress, and in works.
> 
> When i change the weight of one real-server to 0 with
>       ipvsadm -e -t 192.168.64.11:80 -r 192.168.64.15 -g -w 0 
> the server is under load as well.

I assume 192.168.64.15 is www42-2?

> 
>       IP Virtual Server version 0.9.15 (size=65536)
>       Prot LocalAddress:Port Scheduler Flags
>         -> RemoteAddress:Port          Forward Weight ActiveConn InActConn
>       TCP  www42.mobile.test:http rr
>         -> www42-3.mobile.test:http    Route   1      36         1308
>         -> www42-2.mobile.test:http    Route   0      21         1280
>         -> www42-1.mobile.test:http    Route   1      27         1297 
> 
> After the load is stopped _AND_ the InActConn go to 0 after some
> seconds, the result for the next test will be fine, like
> 
>       IP Virtual Server version 0.9.15 (size=65536)
>       Prot LocalAddress:Port Scheduler Flags
>         -> RemoteAddress:Port          Forward Weight ActiveConn InActConn
>       TCP  www42.mobile.test:http rr
>         -> www42-3.mobile.test:http    Route   1      44         1940
>         -> www42-2.mobile.test:http    Route   0      0          0
>         -> www42-1.mobile.test:http    Route   1      54         1930   
> 
> The other way to set the weight to 1 has the same behavior.

I'm sorry I don't understand what you did.

"..has the same behaviour" ... the same behaviour as what?

> At the other hand i searching for an developer newsgroup or an place for
> the newest patches, or is there really nothing changed since June 28 ?

that's the newest.

Joe

--
Joseph Mack mack@xxxxxxxxxxx



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>