|
Hello,
The default of /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_local_port_range is "32768 61000".
In short, 61000 - 32768 = 28232.
Which has nothing to do with IPVS, normally. ip_local_port_range is for
local sockets. IPVS does not do sockets. But let's check the rest of the
email ...
The number of client of our test environment is one.
Ok.
The hash key of ip_vs_conn_tab (connection table) is based on
protocol, s_addr(caddr), s_port(cport), d_addr(vaddr), and d_port(vport).
Correct.
I've corrected your statement a bit:
So I think that the max amount of hash values produced by hash function
is 28232(default) for one client to same virtual server.
Yes, this makes sense.
Therefore, I
think the limit of ActConn + InActConn for every client at a high load
exists and the number of hash key for ip_vs_conn_tab
from same client to same virtual server (to a realserver) is full.
I don't follow you here anymore, I'm sorry. Where does this relation
between act + inact connections to the hash table come from in the code?
So I think that strange behavior at a high load was occured by
the above reason.
I have to go back and read the whole thread but this month I'm unable to
do so.
In short, the cause of the load balancing trouble at a high load is mainly
related to ip_vs_conn table managed by hash key based on the above elements
and the limit of port range of a client
Interesting observation, although right now I don't see the connection
between the hash table and the amount of active and inactive
connections. If your observation is correct, would you be able to
perform following test conduct for me and report back, please?
set ip_local_port_range to 10000-10100 and repeat your tests.
according to your statement it the maximum connection channels should be
topped at around 100.
But I think that this specification of ip_vs is no problem in real
environment.
I believe that if such a deficiency exists, it will very well be a
problem. We still deploy 2.2.x kernel based systems where the local port
range was set from 1024 to 5000.
More questions below.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
IP Virtual Server version 1.2.0 (size=4096)
Prot LocalAddress:Port Scheduler Flags
-> RemoteAddress:Port Forward Weight ActiveConn InActConn
TCP 192.168.0.101:http rr
-> rs02:http Masq 1 0 1
-> rs01:http Masq 1 1 28229
How slow is this machine? Did you fiddle around with TCP-related
settings on the client?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you have netfilter modules loaded? Please don't do performance tests
with any netfilter code unless you want to test netfilter. What does
your /proc/net/ip_conntrack say in this situation?
Regards,
Roberto Nibali, ratz
--
echo '[q]sa[ln0=aln256%Pln256/snlbx]sb3135071790101768542287578439snlbxq' |
|
