LVS
lvs-users
Google
 
Web LinuxVirtualServer.org

Re: Hardware requirements for an LVS director

To: "LinuxVirtualServer.org users mailing list." <lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Hardware requirements for an LVS director
From: "Peter J Milanese" <PMilanese@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 05:28:08 -0400
It would take something very serious (and probably wrong) to have cpu load kill 
an lvs server. The processing is very very simple, so I highly doubt anything 
would go into a waiting state without bigger problems.

Most appliances are linux based on subpar hardware. I've installed backup 
agents and other utility code on my F5's. I will try to get the specs on the 
new big ip's to compare. I'm in the midst of my commute at the moment. In fact 
you can probably compare vendor stats to lvs hardware and find this is 
generally non-issue.


-----------------
Sent from my NYPL BlackBerry Handheld.


----- Original Message -----
From: lvs-users-bounces
Sent: 10/13/2005 05:16 AM
To: lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Hardware requirements for an LVS director

On Thu 13 Oct 2005 09:58:45 BST , mike <mike503@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
wow. so with current-gen hardware like amd64 chips or even intel p4's,
and a gig of ram, i should be able to push at least 600m per month,
which comes out (if my math is right this late at night) to 231
requests per second; i'd love to double or triple that though, if
possible.

Just looking round my kit...

"Busiest" (word used advisedly!) system is a DNS system which is
currently running between 120-150 LVS conns/seq (equates to about 600
queries/sec). It's a P4 3.0GHz, 2GB RAM. Those rates are equivalent
roughly to between 300 and 400 million conns/month, or about 1.5
billion queries/month.

Connection table holds just over 45000 entries (right now).

'free' reports:

[root@frontend01 ~]# free
            total       used       free     shared    buffers     cached
Mem:       2075344    1782160     293184          0     131804    1378988
-/+ buffers/cache:     271368    1803976
Swap:      4208928          0    4208928

This is also running a MySQL server full of DNS data, so the bulk of
the used memory is the query cache for MySQL.

Whichever way I skin this, it isn't breaking a sweat - 1 minute load
rarely exceeds 0.5. I don't yet know how far I could push this, but
I'll know in the next few months how it copes with bigger load as I'll
be moving more authoritative addresses over to it.

Graeme


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