Re: [OT] Replacing reverse squid with mod_proxy

2002-03-26 Thread Igor Sysoev

On Mon, 25 Mar 2002, Hans Juergen von Lengerke wrote:

 We are currently using squid set up as a reverse proxy to accelerate
 several heavy backends (mod_perl, etc) and to protect them from slow
 client connections.
 
 I am looking into replacing the squid with apache+mod_proxy. Why?
 Because ultimately I'd like to be able to cluster the frontend using
 mod_backhand + wackamole. The primary reason for clustering isn't for
 load-balancing (yet) but for failover handling. So, ideally, one machine
 should be enough to serve the whole server load.
 
 Speaking of load, the squid (2.3.STABLE1) is currently doing up to 80
 requests per second at a cache hit ratio of around 72%. This is on one
 box, a Dual 500MHz Pentium III with 1GB RAM. Average object size is 6KB.
 200/304 ratio is around 5/3.
 
 Now, I've tried to replace the squid with apache+mod_proxy (1.3.11) and
 the frontend very quickly came to a standstill. I set MaxClients to 256
 but all slots filled up fast. I upped MaxClients to 512 (recompiled with
 patched httpd.h) but the result was the same. All slots were occupied in
 no time and the server ground to a halt.
 
 Now I'm left with two choices: give up or try harder :-)
 
 Before I decide for one of them I thought I'd ask on the lists (sorry
 for the x-post) to see if the above numbers (80 Hits/Second) are in fact
 feasible with apache/mod_proxy on one box. Are there any benchmarks
 around? Does someone have a similar setup and how many requests can they
 serve?  Should I up MaxClients any further? Will I get better results
 using a newer version of apache? Or should I give up and stick with
 squid?

Apache can easy handle 80r/s on Ethernet or localhost connection.
But if connections are slow (i.e. modem users) and responses
are big enough then you can reach MaxClients. As far as I know
80r/s rate requires about 400-600 Apache with 20-40K responses.
If your responses are bigger then more Apaches you need.

You can increase MaxClients until your swap is free.
On 1G you can run about 1000-2000 plain Apaches.

But if you plan to use mod_proxy to proxy backend I think
you should use mod_accel.

Igor Sysoev





Re: [OT] Replacing reverse squid with mod_proxy

2002-03-25 Thread Irmund Thum


- Original Message -
From: Hans Juergen von Lengerke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Monday, March 25, 2002 4:20 pm
Subject: [OT] Replacing reverse squid with mod_proxy

 Now I'm left with two choices: give up or try harder :-)
 
 Before I decide for one of them I thought I'd ask on the lists (sorry
 for the x-post) to see if the above numbers (80 Hits/Second) are 
 in fact
 feasible with apache/mod_proxy on one box. Are there any benchmarks
 around? Does someone have a similar setup and how many requests 
 can they
 serve?  Should I up MaxClients any further? Will I get better results
 using a newer version of apache? Or should I give up and stick with
 squid?

before giving up you should try 1.3.24 out of March 21 with a re-worked code for 
mod_proxy; regarding benchmarks I remember a comparison with the tux kernel server, 
iis5 and apache and more than 500 hits/sec for the last two was beaten by tux with a 
factor 3.
Should be enough for your purpose
_ ___
|  |  IrmundThum
|  | 




Re: [OT] Replacing reverse squid with mod_proxy

2002-03-25 Thread Joshua Slive


[Cross-posting to multiple mailing lists is dangerous (and a little
annoying) because people responding will usually not be members of all the
lists, and will therefore have to deal with bounces.]

On Mon, 25 Mar 2002, Hans Juergen von Lengerke wrote:

 Now, I've tried to replace the squid with apache+mod_proxy (1.3.11) and

Why are you setting up a new service with an ancient version of apache?
mod_proxy has improved immensly since then.  Use 1.3.24.

Joshua.




Re: [OT] Replacing reverse squid with mod_proxy

2002-03-25 Thread Ged Haywood

Hi there,

On Mon, 25 Mar 2002, Hans Juergen von Lengerke wrote:

 I am looking into replacing the squid with apache+mod_proxy.

I don't know if it will do what you need, but you might want to have
a look at mod_accel.  If this URI is broken mail dapiatmaildotru
for the information.

http://dapi.chaz.ru/articles/mod_accel.xml?lang=en

73,
Ged.