|
Hello Julian,
I rechecked all the figures after a while. Below is average statistics for
the peak hour.
1. "port 0", "HZ/10" patches on Master, "port 0", "HZ/10" patches on Backup
sync_threshold = 3 10
Results: sync traffic 75 Mbit/s, 6300 packets/sec, 58 %sys CPU on Backup, 44
%soft CPU on Master
PersistConn: 93.53%
ActiveConn: 98.12%
InActConn: 99.47%
2. "port 0", "HZ/10" and "sync" patches on Master, "port 0", "HZ/10" patches
on Backup
sync_refresh_period = 1000
sync_retries = 0
sync_threshold = 0 0
Results: sync traffic 50 Mbit/s, 4200 packets/sec, 42 %sys CPU on Backup, 46
%soft CPU on Master
PersistConn: 96.06%
ActiveConn: 98.53%
InActConn: 98.92%
Forwarded traffic and connections rate was the same in both case. So, looks
like new sync mechanism is more efficient.
Regards,
Aleksey
_______________________________________________
Please read the documentation before posting - it's available at:
http://www.linuxvirtualserver.org/
LinuxVirtualServer.org mailing list - lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Send requests to lvs-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
or go to http://lists.graemef.net/mailman/listinfo/lvs-users
|
