LVS
lvs-users
Google
 
Web LinuxVirtualServer.org

Re: About traffic load

To: lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: About traffic load
From: hotman <zhaohf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 17:10:31 +0800
Hi,

Roberto Nibali wrote:

Hi,

Very nice ascii sketch!! How long did this take to draw?
 

Do not need too much time.
 
> Hi, every one.
>
> How are you?

Fine, how are you?

> There is a problem about traffic load.
>
> We have used two kind of cpus to test the traffic load. One is Celeron566, and
> the
> other is  Pentium3-700. The result is the following:
>
>             Celeron566 ------ 1050 Req/Sec
>             Pentium3-700 ----- 700 Req/Sec

I don't believe it. This must be a wrong setup or a damaged hardware component.
Its impossible that a lousy Celeron is faster then a P3. Sorry pal, such is
life.
 

 
> The web monitoring tool is WebBench4.0.

Never tried but this is not the point anyway.
 

You said it.
 
> [Enviroment]
>
>   +-----+
>   |     |
>   | CL1 +----+                                    +------------+
>   |     |    |                                    | RS1        |
>   +-----+    |                                    | CPU P3-550 |
> 192.168.0.16 |                              +-----+ MEM 128MB  |
>   +-----+    |                              |     | W2K        |
>   |     |    |                              |     |192.168.0.61|
>   | CL2 +----|                              |     +------------+
>   |     |    |         Director             |     +------------+
>   +-----+    |    +---------------------+   |     |   RS2      |
> 192.168.0.17 |    |CPU Celeron566/P3-700|   |     | CPU P3-500 |
>   +-----+    +----|MEM 128MB            |---+-----+ MEM 64MB   |
>   |     |    |    |Linux Kernel 2.2.15  |   |     | Linux      |
>   | CL3 +----|    |LVS 0.9.13           |   |     |192.168.0.62|
>   |     |    |    |192.168.0.51         |   |     +------------+
>   +-----+    |    +---------------------+   |     +------------+
> 192.168.0.100|       VIP:192.168.0.3        |     | RS3        |
>   +-----+    |       Schedule:LC            |     | CPU P3-450 |
>   |     |    |       HB:Ping HTTP           +-----+ MEM 128MB  |
>   | CL4 +----+                                    | Linux      |
>   |     |                                         |192.168.0.63|
>   +-----+                                         +------------+
> 192.168.0.110

I assume you're using LVS_DR seeing your setup. But why are you using
2 NICs?

Not 2 NICs. I only want to describe the problem in more clear way.
To avoid the arp-problem?
No. we use ipchains.
So the DGW for the all RS is the LB?
The RS is LB.
 
With this setup the replies must travel back through the director and
then you have the performance problems of LVS_NAT. Please change the
setup to the LVS_DR setup depicted in the howto. And then we might
check out your problem again.
 
I am very sure that i setup to LVS_DR.  I know the difference betwwen LVS_DR and LVS_NAT.
 
> I kon't know why the higher the frequency of cpu is, the slower the traffic
> is.

It's impossible IMHO. But YMMV,

Roberto Nibali, ratz

--
mailto: `echo NrOatSz@xxxxxxxxx | sed 's/[NOSPAM]//g'`

_______________________________________________
LinuxVirtualServer.org mailing list - lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Send requests to lvs-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
or go to http://www.in-addr.de/mailman/listinfo/lvs-users

Best regards.
Zhao.
 
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Re: About traffic load, hotman <=