|
ok, i saw that IP_VS_DEST_F_OVERLOAD is set and unset by the core LVS,
but i can't find where the thresholds are set. As can i see, this
thresholds are always set to Zero in userpace.
Is this right?
On Thu, Oct 23, 2003 at 12:24:38PM +0900, Horms wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2003 at 04:24:34PM -0300, Diego Woitasen (Lanux) wrote:
> > Ok, but what set the IP_VS_DEST_F_OVERLOAD in struct ip_vs_dst?
>
> Hi,
>
> I think that Peter has answered a slightly different question
> which relates to external programes monitoring LVS and reconfiguring
> LVS on-the-fly.
>
> The question that you ask relates to LVS's internal handling
> of connection thresholds for real servers which is available
> in the 1.1.x tree for the 2.6.x kernel.
>
> IP_VS_DEST_F_OVERLOAD is set and unset by the core LVS code when
> the high and low thresholds are passed for a real server.
> If a scheduler honours this flag then it should not allocate
> new connections to real servers with this flag set. As far as
> I can see all the supplied schedulers honour this flag. But if
> a scheduler did not then it would just be ignored. That is real
> servers would have new connections allocated regardless of
> if IP_VS_DEST_F_OVERLOAD is set or not. It would be as if
> no connection thresholds had been set.
>
> Note that if persistancy is in use then subsequent connections
> to the same real server for a given client within the persistancy
> timeout are not scheduled as such. Thus additional connections
> of this nature can be allocated to a real server even if
> it has been marked IP_VS_DEST_F_OVERLOAD. This, IMHO, is
> a desirable behaviour.
>
> --
> 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
|
