Am 29.12.2018 um 07:41 schrieb Willy Tarreau: > On Fri, Dec 28, 2018 at 07:55:11PM +0100, Aleksandar Lazic wrote: >> Well as far as I understood the pdf one of the biggest difference is that >> Maglev is a distributed system where the consistent hash is for local system. > > No, not at all. The difference is that it's designed for packet processing > so they have to take care of connection tracking and per-packet processing > cost. From what I've read in the paper, it could be seen as a subset of > what we already do : > - server weights are not supported in Maglev (and very likely not needed) > - slow start is not supported > - server insertion/removal can be extremely expensive (O(N^2)) due to the > way they need to build the hash table for fast lookup > - no possibility for bounded load either > > It's really important to understand the different focus of the algorithm, > being packet-oriented instead of L7-oriented. This explains a number of > differences and choices. I think Maglev is excellent for what it does and > that our mechanism wouldn't be as fast if used on a per-packet basis. But > conversely, we already do the same and even much more by default because > we work at a different layer.
I thought I have misunderstood the Idea behind maglev, thanks for clarification. > Willy Cheers Aleks
