|
Jeffrey A Schoolcraft wrote:
>
> I have set up an LVS managing two servers with rr:
>
> [root@lb1 /root]# ipvsadm -L -n
> IP Virtual Server version 0.9.16 (size=16384)
> Prot LocalAddress:Port Scheduler Flags
> -> RemoteAddress:Port Forward Weight ActiveConn InActConn
> TCP 192.168.33.169:80 rr persistent 100
> -> 192.168.33.113:80 Route 1 0 0
> -> 192.168.33.114:80 Route 1 0 0
>
> ifconfig:
> eth0:0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:D0:B7:1E:8D:56
> inet addr:192.168.33.169 Bcast:192.168.33.169
> Mask:255.255.255.255
> UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
> Interrupt:5 Base address:0xef00 Memory:d0873000-d0873900
>
> (169) is a Virtual IP address.
>
> When I run two test scripts against it (basically a perl for loop with
> wget/a bunch of files/) performance is fine,
> I get 100Mbits/sec from both machines.
is that a total of 2*100Mpbs or 1*100Mbs?
> System resources on the lvs machine
> are fine with just two threads.
is a "thread" == client perl script process?
When I bump this number up to 4 my net
> performance drops way down,
does "performance" == throughput?
and load on the lvs goes up to about 50-60%.
> (LVS is running all by itself on this server).
where/how do you measure this? I've never got above 5% with
VS-DR monitoring with top. Then I've never put through more
than 50Mbps either.
> When I bump it up to 6 or
> more, performance is terrible and the LVS get's killed,
do you mean that the throughput dropped?
(like 90-100% system
> resources, as reported by top).
> I thought we should have no overhead running a DR approach.
Shifting 100Mbps of packets requires some work, but I wouldn't have
expected the results you got.
you sound like you've pushed VS-DR harder than anyone else. I wouldn't
have expected that the director be working any harder than if it was
just routing the same number of packets. So I don't know why this happened.
I assume you have 100Mbps ethernet and 1 client. What is the throughput
returning to the client for each of these tests and how does that compare
to the throughput you get when getting the files directly from the real-servers?
How does this compare to changing the LVS director to just a router for
the two realservers.
You must have a healthy set of disks on the real-servers to get 100Mbps
of files back from them.
Joe
--
Joseph Mack PhD, Senior Systems Engineer, Lockheed Martin
contractor to the National Environmental Supercomputer Center,
mailto:mack.joseph@xxxxxxx ph# 919-541-0007, RTP, NC, USA
|
