|
I sent this in last week under the subject "I think I found a minor bug in
persistence time-outs."
I observed the same behavior, and traced it down to the scenario where the
template record times out with valid connection records still counting down.
In this case, the template record is reset to 2 minutes (actually, to the value
of the IP_VS_S_TIME_WAIT constant). When this happens, the data structure
record representing the template connection also gets altered, because any
further connections from the client reset the template record to 2 minutes (NOT
the original session persistence time).
The replies I got from Julian Anastasov [ja@xxxxxx] suggested that this
behavior was intended, (and thus, I would suggest, the documentation is
slightly inaccurate).
I didn't pursue it too far, as I this only showed up when I was using really
short persistence times for testing purposes. I don't expect it will happen
too often or have too much impact when using a more practical session timeout
time.
Terry Green
Mitra Imaging
tgreen@xxxxxxxxx
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joseph Mack [mailto:mack.joseph@xxxxxxx]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 3:10 PM
> To: lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: about persistence timeout problem
>
>
> SB CH wrote:
> >
>
> >
> > What's the matter and how can I unsderstand this 2 minute again?
>
> I don't know the answer, but since no-one else is picking it up, I'll
> reply.
>
> Persistence is usually set to be a long time (600secs). tcpip timeouts
> are in the order of 2 mins (and you don't want to change
> them). Possibly
> you cannot set persistence below the tcpip timeouts
>
> Joe
>
> --
> Joseph Mack PhD, Senior Systems Engineer, SAIC contractor
> to the National Environmental Supercomputer Center,
> ph# 919-541-0007, RTP, NC, USA. mailto:mack.joseph@xxxxxxx
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
========================================================
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Julian Anastasov [mailto:ja@xxxxxx]
> Sent: Friday, February 07, 2003 8:29 PM
> To: Terry Green
> Cc: lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: I think I found a minor bug in persistence time-outs.
>
>
>
> Hello,
>
> On Thu, 6 Feb 2003, Terry Green wrote:
>
> > - however, if the template record is allowed to expire, it
> will be kept
> > because there's still an active connection, but it's time
> will be reset
> > to IP_VS_S_TIME_WAIT constant (defaulted to 2 minutes in
> ip_vs_conn.c)
> > rather than to the persistence time set for this session.
> Further, the
>
> Yes, as implemented, the persistence timeout guarantees
> afinity starting from the first connection. It lasts _after_ the
> last connection from this "session" is terminated. There is still
> no option to say "persistence time starts for each connection",
> it could be useful.
>
> > data structure for the connection template appears to have been
> > corrupted, as any further connections from the client reset
> the template
> > time to 2 minutes instead of the original persistence time.
>
> > - Running my tests again, I see the connection template record being
> > reset to 1:40 instead of 2:00.
>
> May be you see it 20 seconds after the 2-minute cycle
> is restarted. It is "reset" only when its timer expires, not when
> the controlled connections expire.
>
> Regards
>
> --
> Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>
>
>
|
