LVS
lvs-users
Google
 
Web LinuxVirtualServer.org

Re: Slow SSL

To: "LinuxVirtualServer.org users mailing list." <lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Slow SSL
From: LVS@xxxxxxxxx
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 15:19:02 -0600
Horms wrote:

On Mon, Feb 21, 2005 at 09:46:47PM -0600, Jeff Royal wrote:
I've added an SSL server to my realserver list.
Here is an example of my ldirectord.cf

# Global Directives
checktimeout=20
checkinterval=10
logfile="/var/log/ldirectord.log"
quiescent=no

# Virtual Server for HTTP
virtual=192.168.22.41:80
       real=lweb1:80 masq
       real=lweb2:80 masq
       fallback=192.168.22.70:80
       service=http
       request="/us/index.jsp"
       receive="working"
       scheduler=wlc
       persistent=1800
       netmask=255.255.255.0
       protocol=tcp
       checktype=negotiate

# Virtual Server for HTTPS
virtual=192.168.22.41:443
       real=lweb3:443 masq
       service=https
       request="/test.ipage"
       receive="working"
       scheduler=wlc
       persistent=1800
       protocol=tcp
       checktype=negotiate

I can get to the server through https:// but the pages load very slowly (~2 minutes compared to 4 seconds if I go directly to the realserver address)

I'm not sure where to start, as it works.

Try using something like tcpdump or ethereal to trace the packets on the
network and see what is going on.

Thanks!!
FIXED!!

Looking at a tcpdump I was able to see that during the load of the page there were requests made to HTTP. Working with the developers we found some code that was hard coded to port 80. Removing that hard code the pages flew...

Last question. There was a 20 second lag (looking at the tcpdump) each time one of these (http) requests were made. When one of these requests were made the LB had to switch to another machine (as HTTP was not sent to this machine). Was the fact that we have a persistence setting causing the 20 second lag or was the delay strictly in our Java application? I ask because I don't know if the 20 second "checktimeout" setting was just a coincidence.



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