|
Depends on what kind of real server you have, it could take
half the world to get them fully exhausted. I run a test on
a box with 500 new connection per second, total 50,000
connection on it, it only used about 25MB memory out of
128MB, and CPU usage is about 8% of a Celeron 600MHz.
At 03:16 PM 11/1/2001 -0800, you wrote:
>I actually have the same question. I have seen on the web site that it only
>recommends 20 real servers behind the LVS. What is this based upon?
>
>Rob.
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: lvs-users-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>[mailto:lvs-users-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Wayne
>>Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 2:51 PM
>>To: lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>Subject: RE: NAT Performance and what is a good bench mark?
>>
>>
>>You bottleneck is not CPU or memory. It is the network cards.
>>If you have heavy outgoing connections, the number of ports
>>could be masqueraded could be a limiting factor, too.
>>
>>At 02:33 PM 11/1/2001 -0800, you wrote:
>>>I too have been looking to benchmark an LVS-NAT setup using the 2.4 kernel
>>>but I'm not sure what a good benchmark is? What do people suggest for the
>>>following setup?
>>>
>>># | |
>>># | client |
>>># |________|
>>># CIP=eth0 192.168.1.13
>>># |
>>># |
>>># VIP=eth0:0 192.168.1.200/32
>>># __________
>>># | |
>>># | director |
>>># |__________|
>>># DIP=eth2:254 10.10.10.200/24
>>># |
>>># |
>>># |
>>># --------------------------------------------
>>># | | |
>>># | | |
>>># RIP1=eth0 RIP2=eth0 RIP=eth0
>>># 10.10.10.10 10.10.10.20 10.10.10.30
>>># ______________ ______________ ________________
>>># | | | | | |
>>># | rs1 | | rs2 | | rs3 |
>>># |______________| |______________| |________________|
>>>
>>>Director = 2x 1GHz 1Gig RAM 2 onboard Pro100's and 1 64bit/66MHz
>>>Pro1000(talks to real server)
>>>
>>>Realservers = 3X same config as above but no Pro1000 (could add though)
>>>
>>>All running the 2.4-9 linux kernel with that level of LVS code.
>>The network
>>>is fully switched 100/1000.
>>>
>>>Any suggestions would be helpful. Definitely looking to benchmark web or
>>>streaming type content.
>>>
>>>--Ben Odom
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: Peter Mueller [mailto:pmueller@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
>>>Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 1:08 PM
>>>To: 'lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx'
>>>Subject: RE: NAT Performance
>>>
>>>|I'm considering LVS as a replacement to Cisco LocalDirectors to front
>>>|several SMTP server farms. Due to customer-end constraints we
>>>|need to do
>>>|this via NAT. Target throughput is up to 40 Mbps. Is this
>>>|realistic? LVS
>>>|hardware is likely to be twin 1GHz Pentiums.
>>>|
>>>
>>>40mbps sounds all right on dual-1ghz box, assuming you use later
>>2.4 kernel
>>>on your director. Be very stingy on your NICs.. for example
>>eepro100's seem
>>>to historically be 'uncertain' with high bandwidth..
>>>
>>>I haven't seen a "gauranteed" figure with newer 2.4 kernels. However,
>>>lurking on the mailing list for a year or so now has led me to
>>believe that
>>>the key LVS people now believe NAT (with 2.4 kernel) to perform similar to
>>>DR. LVS-DR easily exceeds 40mbs, assuming you have decent hardware.
>>>
>>>some probably outdated performance evaluations:
>>>http://www.linuxvirtualserver.org/Joseph.Mack/performance/single_r
>ealserver_
>>performance.html
>>and
>>http://www.linuxvirtualserver.org/Documents.html#manuals (look under
>>performance)
>>
>>===
>>
>>bottom line : if I were you, I would have a basic assumption that it will
>>perform and proceed directly to your testing of LVS-NAT and see if it does.
>>It would only take 2-3 days and could possibly save you lots of $.
>>
>>Peter
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>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
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>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
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>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
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>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
|
