Hi,

All the balancers have thread/process safe issues, but with bybusyness the effect is worse, basically a worker may stay with a busy count greater than zero even no request is being processed.

busy is displayed in the balancer_handler() so users/customers will notice the value doesn't return to zero...

If you run a load test the value of busy will increase by time and in all the workers

When using bybusyness, having pics in the load and later no much load makes the lowest busy workers used and the ones with a wrong higher value not being used.

In a test with 3 workers, I end with busy:
worker1: 3
worker2: 0
worker3: 2
Doing the load test several time the buys values are increasing in all workers.

I am wondering is we could end with something like:
worker1: 1000
worker2: 0
worker3: 1000

in this case bybusyness will send all the load to worker2 until we reach 1000 simultaneous request on worker2... Obvious that looks bad.

How to fix that?
1 - reset the busy using a watchdog and elected (or transferred+read) unchanged for some time (using one of timeout we have on workers). 2 - warn in the docs that bybusyness is not the best choice for loadbalancing.
3 - create another balancer that just choose random a worker.

--
Cheers

Jean-Frederic

Reply via email to