|
I am using Tunneling, so it sounds to me based upon what you are saying is that
my limitation is my hardware, and it's capcities.
Rob.
>-----Original Message-----
>From: lvs-users-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>[mailto:lvs-users-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Horms
>Sent: Monday, July 02, 2001 8:40 AM
>To: lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: Re: Limitations
>
>
>On Mon, Jul 02, 2001 at 08:16:22AM -0700, Rob Leasure wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I was wondering if there are any known limitations for LVS? In
>> particular, I was wondering about the maximum number of servers I
>> can have behind the LVS without any risk of failure.
>
>
>LVS does not set artificial limits on the number of servers that you can
>have. The real limitations are the number of packets you can get through
>the box, the ammount of memory you have to store connection information and
>in the case of LVS-NAT the number of ports available for masquerading.
>These limitations effect the number of concurrent connections you can
>handle and your maximum through-put. This indirectly effects how many
>servers you can have.
>
>--
>Horms
>
>_______________________________________________
>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
>
|
