Just did, its showing on metronome: Gentian-DNSDIST-TEST

On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 10:16, Remi Gacogne <remi.gaco...@powerdns.com>
wrote:

> Hi Gentian,
>
> On 8/12/19 10:12 AM, Gentian Bajraktari wrote:
> > I have attached results from resperf ( latest compiled, 2.3.1) and the
> > configuration file (dnsdist.conf)
>
> Would you consider sending metrics to our public metronome server [1]
> so we understand what's the limiting factor during your tests? You only
> need to add a line like this one to your dnsdist configuration:
>
> carbonServer("37.252.122.50:2003",
> "put-the-name-you-want-to-display-here", 5)
>
> This will only send some metrics without any private information and is
> very useful to understand where the bottleneck may be.
>
> [1]: https://metronome1.powerdns.com/
>
> Best regards,
>
> Remi
>
> > On Sat, 10 Aug 2019 at 22:30, Klaus Darilion
> > <klaus.mailingli...@pernau.at <mailto:klaus.mailingli...@pernau.at>>
> wrote:
> >
> >     Am 08.08.2019 um 10:20 schrieb Gentian Bajraktari:
> >     > Dear Dnsdist community,
> >     >
> >     > we are trying to setup dnsdist as a loadbalancer for 2 bind
> recursive
> >     > cache only servers,
> >     >
> >     > we have done a very simple setup:
> >     > addLocal("DNSDIST_IP")
> >     > newServer({address="BIND_IP1"})
> >     > newServer({address=" BIND_IP2"})
> >     > setServerPolicy(roundrobin)
> >     >
> >     > but when we test with resperf (from dnsperf tool), the results are
> >     very
> >     > bad for DNSDIST, around 5-15K QPS , while when we test directly to
> >     one
> >     > of BIND ip addresses the QPS goes up to 50-60Qps.
> >     >
> >     > we have tried both rpm install of dnsdist, compiling from source
> and
> >     > even comiling the concur version but all with similar results, ie
> >     when
> >     > resperf tests go through dnsdist the results are much lower in
> >     terms of qps.
> >     >
> >     > OS is Centos7 in all servers, tweaked all settings for file
> >     limits, udp
> >     > connections etc.
> >     >
> >     > any thoughts on what we can do? maybe resperf is not the tool to
> test
> >     > this? do you have some suggetions on how we can test and make sure
> we
> >     > are doing the right thing?
> >
> >     I had similar results. Starting 4 listening threads and 4 receivers
> >     threads (by adding the same backend 4 times) boosted my performance -
> >     almost linear.
> >
> >     If it still does not work your should post your config (and first
> test
> >     without any rules to avoid performance issues because of rules)
> >
> >     regards
> >     Klaus
> >     _______________________________________________
> >     dnsdist mailing list
> >     dnsdist@mailman.powerdns.com <mailto:dnsdist@mailman.powerdns.com>
> >     https://mailman.powerdns.com/mailman/listinfo/dnsdist
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > dnsdist mailing list
> > dnsdist@mailman.powerdns.com
> > https://mailman.powerdns.com/mailman/listinfo/dnsdist
> >
>
>
> --
> Remi Gacogne
> PowerDNS.COM BV - https://www.powerdns.com/
>
> _______________________________________________
> dnsdist mailing list
> dnsdist@mailman.powerdns.com
> https://mailman.powerdns.com/mailman/listinfo/dnsdist
>
_______________________________________________
dnsdist mailing list
dnsdist@mailman.powerdns.com
https://mailman.powerdns.com/mailman/listinfo/dnsdist

Reply via email to