|
Thanks for the reponse
i manually added lovejoy by editing the ldirectord.cf
on krusty and flanders they are rh9 and Apache/2.0.52
lovejoy is fedora 4 and Apache/2.0.54
Randy
On 2/7/06, Graeme Fowler <graeme@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi
>
> On Tue 07 Feb 2006 16:54:17 GMT , Randy Paries <rtparies@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Does this give you any insight?
> >
> > ipvsadm -Ln --rate
> > IP Virtual Server version 1.0.10 (size=65536)
> > Prot LocalAddress:Port CPS InPPS OutPPS InBPS OutBPS
> > -> RemoteAddress:Port
> > TCP 66.208.187.10:80 61 1220 0 108590 0
> > -> 192.168.0.159:80 52 867 0 72101 0
> > -> 192.168.0.204:80 5 138 0 16551 0
> > -> 192.168.0.203:80 4 214 0 19937 0
> > TCP 66.208.187.10:443 0 0 0 0 0
> > -> 192.168.0.203:443 0 0 0 0 0
>
> 192.168.0.159 - I assume this is local.lovejoy? If so, it's handling 10
> times the connections per second that the other are for a given number
> of ActiveConn in the basic output.
>
> > ipvsadm -Ln --stats
> > IP Virtual Server version 1.0.10 (size=65536)
> > Prot LocalAddress:Port Conns InPkts OutPkts InBytes OutBytes
> > -> RemoteAddress:Port
> > TCP 66.208.187.10:80 22291846 1257M 0 152G 0
> > -> 192.168.0.159:80 742593 8850902 0 998205K 0
> > -> 192.168.0.204:80 10094273 593304K 0 71634M 0
> > -> 192.168.0.203:80 11422135 655111K 0 80084M 0
> > TCP 66.208.187.10:443 117751 993403 0 155060K 0
> > -> 192.168.0.203:443 49549 419180 0 66259192 0
>
> You added local.lovejoy after the other machines by running ipvsadm by
> hand, right?
>
> The "--rate" output makes it look to me that your new server is a *lot*
> better in terms of performance when compared to your other two machines.
> As I remember it, the wlc scheduler looks at the number of active
> connections and sends the next connection to the least-loaded server.
> Given that your ipvsadm output is only a specific point in time, and it
> shows that local.lovejoy has *more* connections than the other two,
> that might not seem too sensible - however if those connections are
> getting to TIME_WAIT or FIN_WAIT much more quickly than the other two
> machines, it is able to handle more connections and therefore the
> real-time figure is likely to bounce up and down around the same level
> as the older machines.
>
> What specifications are your older machines, and what is the new one?
> What Apache versions are they running?
>
> Graeme
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
|
