Hello,
We have a farm of asp.net web servers behind haproxy configured with
round-robin.
It seems to work but in fact the requests are not evenly distributed.
All the servers have the same capacity and there's no priority declared in the
haproxy configuration file.
Does anybody know w
On 18-8-2009 14:08, Johan Duflost wrote:
Hello,
We have a farm of asp.net web servers behind haproxy configured with
round-robin.
It seems to work but in fact the requests are not evenly distributed.
All the servers have the same capacity and there's no priority declared
in the ha
Cc:
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 2:40 PM
Subject: Re: round robin
On 18-8-2009 14:08, Johan Duflost wrote:
Hello,
We have a farm of asp.net web servers behind haproxy configured with
round-robin.
It seems to work but in fact the requests are not evenly distributed.
All the servers have the same ca
y new users (which) don't have a cookie will be
round-robin sent to a new server.
If you do want perfect balancing, you have to turn off stickyness. But
that might mean you have to adapt your ASP.NET application to non-sticky
sessions (if you need server-side user sessions, you'll hav
?
Cheers,
Johan
- Original Message -
From: "Angelo Höngens"
To:
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 4:41 PM
Subject: Re: round robin
On 18-8-2009 16:34, Johan Duflost wrote:
Hello,
Here is an excerpt of our config file :
appsession ASP.NET_SessionId len 52
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 08:43:34AM +0200, Johan Duflost wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Yes I know that session stickyness is enabled and this is what we need.
> The problem is that when we make load tests with for example 10 concurrent
> new users and 5 backend servers, we
> noticed that some servers handle
Hello Willy,
Thank you for your answer.
I will check the stats.
Is this "resonance problem" specific to haproxy?
Cheers,
Johan
- Original Message -
From: "Willy Tarreau"
To: "Johan Duflost"
Cc: "Angelo Höngens" ;
Sent: Thursday, August 2
On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 12:19:01PM +0200, Johan Duflost wrote:
> Hello Willy,
>
> Thank you for your answer.
> I will check the stats.
> Is this "resonance problem" specific to haproxy?
No not at all, it's specific to the round-robin
algorithm instead, which may b
han Duflost"
Cc: "Angelo Höngens" ;
Sent: Saturday, August 22, 2009 7:51 AM
Subject: Re: round robin
On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 12:19:01PM +0200, Johan Duflost wrote:
Hello Willy,
Thank you for your answer.
I will check the stats.
Is this "resonance problem" specific to ha
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 03:39:44PM +0200, Johan Duflost wrote:
> Hello Willy,
>
> Ok I can understand this issue but when session stickyness is enabled, all
> the objects should be retreived from the same server, isn't it?
yes you're right, they should.
> So it's probably not our problem.
Then
Ok thanks Willy for your help.
- Original Message -
From: "Willy Tarreau"
To: "Johan Duflost"
Cc: "Angelo Höngens" ;
Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2009 6:32 AM
Subject: Re: round robin
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 03:39:44PM +0200, Johan Duflost wrote:
Hel
Hi All,
We got hit with a bit of traffic and we saw haproxy dump most of the
traffic to 3-4 app servers, sometimes even just one and driving load on
there to 90. We were running 1.5.9, I upgraded to 1.5.10 and the same
problem remained. Currently traffic is low so everything is load balanced
e
Hi all,
With round robin load balancing and the http-server-close option, do
connections that were part of the same keep alive session on the client side
all hit the same web server, or do those requests end up being round robin
as well?
Thanks!
Kyle
instead of round robin?
That might give more fair distribution of load in this situation.
Regards,
Vivek
On Jan 14, 2015 11:45 PM, "Alexey Zilber" wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> We got hit with a bit of traffic and we saw haproxy dump most of the
> traffic to 3-4 app servers, somet
> see how they are same for every server.
>
> It seems that all your requests are not the same workload. Some servers or
> some requests are taking longer to fulfill and increasing load on servers.
> Have you tried using leastconn instead of round robin?
>
> That might give
onn on app backends and round-robin on static/varnish
backends
On Thu, 15 Jan 2015 22:14:18 +0800, Alexey Zilber
wrote:
> Hi Vivek,
>
> You're correct. I think the situation was that there was a huge influx
> of traffic, and some servers went over their tipping point of
Hi Kyle,
On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 10:30:39AM -0400, Kyle Brandt wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> With round robin load balancing and the http-server-close option, do
> connections that were part of the same keep alive session on the client side
> all hit the same web server, or do those reques
So lets say that I don't want HAProxy to close the connections to my
backend servers - they can stay active and be available for keepalives -
but I do want every request from the frontend to go to a different backend
via round robin. The idea being that it keeps one frontend connection
On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 12:46:17AM -0500, CJ Ess wrote:
> So lets say that I don't want HAProxy to close the connections to my
> backend servers - they can stay active and be available for keepalives -
> but I do want every request from the frontend to go to a different backend
>
Hi guys,
I have set up a TCP load balancer in haproxy and set the balance to round
robin. Looking at the stats page and the test pages I have got it doesn't
seem to work and it always goes to the first node from the list.
When I switched that to haproxy 1.5 for a test with the same config i
Server 12.04.
It is my intention to provide load balancing in each route client by
increasing the number of DNS servers in each route client.
I now have two DNS servers per route client (Master and Slave) with
round robin DNS. I am aware that round robin provides load distribution
and not realy
Hi Thorvald,
Are all the servers up in the farm?
Baptiste
On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 12:08 PM, Thorvald Hallvardsson
wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> I have set up a TCP load balancer in haproxy and set the balance to round
> robin. Looking at the stats page and the test pages I have got it do
Hi Thorvald,
On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 11:08:26AM +, Thorvald Hallvardsson wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> I have set up a TCP load balancer in haproxy and set the balance to round
> robin. Looking at the stats page and the test pages I have got it doesn't
> seem to work and it alwa
rvald,
>
> Are all the servers up in the farm?
>
> Baptiste
>
> On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 12:08 PM, Thorvald Hallvardsson
> wrote:
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > I have set up a TCP load balancer in haproxy and set the balance to round
> > robin. Looking at the stats
up a TCP load balancer in haproxy and set the balance to round
> > robin. Looking at the stats page and the test pages I have got it doesn't
> > seem to work and it always goes to the first node from the list.
> >
> > When I switched that to haproxy 1.5 for a test with t
On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 01:49:39PM +, Thorvald Hallvardsson wrote:
> Hi Willy,
>
> I have kept F5 pressed for number of seconds. Then I checked the status
> page and saw which node was active in the traffic. The first one only had
> something in the rest had zeroes. I tried that from different
Hi,
You actually right. Tested with curl worked like a charm.
Thank you.
On 29 January 2014 14:00, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 01:49:39PM +, Thorvald Hallvardsson wrote:
> > Hi Willy,
> >
> > I have kept F5 pressed for number of seconds. Then I checked the status
> > pa
Ubuntu Server 12.04.
It is my intention to provide load balancing in each route client by
increasing the number of DNS servers in each route client.
I now have two DNS servers per route client (Master and Slave) with
round robin DNS. I am aware that round robin provides load
distribution and not
On 9/6/12 4:59 AM, ril.kidd wrote:
Hello,
I have setup anycast DNS using BIND as the DNS server and BIRD routing
daemon. I have 1 route server
and 5 route clients.
If you are using anycast, why not just let the routers load multiple
routes to the destination IP, and let it do 'load balancing'
On 09/06/12 12:28, David Coulson wrote:
On 9/6/12 4:59 AM, ril.kidd wrote:
Hello,
I have setup anycast DNS using BIND as the DNS server and BIRD
routing daemon. I have 1 route server
and 5 route clients.
If you are using anycast, why not just let the routers load multiple
routes to the desti
30 matches
Mail list logo
