LVS
lvs-users
Google
 
Web LinuxVirtualServer.org

Re: persistence-check and timeout

To: "LinuxVirtualServer.org users mailing list." <lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: persistence-check and timeout
From: Horms <horms@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2003 21:41:54 +0900
On Mon, Sep 01, 2003 at 01:22:39PM +0200, Kettler, Holger wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I recently posted my experience with persistence and the strange
> behaviour
> of lvs to assign new connections to a 'busy' server although there might
> 
> have been servers with no connection at all.
> 
> Maybe this is not a bug but rather a timing problem. I noticed an
> optimal
> sharing of all rservers if all connections came in shortly. Refering to 
> this I have some questions:
> 
> If (the only) connection timed out (TCP_WAIT==0), the server is handled
> as 'free' and may get the next incoming request, even if there exists an
> (active) persistence-template (involving this server)?
> 
> The point is, if the expired client decides to go on, it will get the
> same
> rserver as before for persistance reasons. This rserver is overloaded in
> proportion to all others, because of the new connection AND the pers.
> one.

Rats and I were working on some code which may resolv this.
Unfortunately it isn't finished and neither of us have
much time at the moment.

-- 
Horms
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>