Hi James, On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 07:28:39AM +0100, Baptiste wrote: > On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 11:00 PM, James Bardin <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 1:43 PM, Coates, James <[email protected]> > > wrote: > >> We recently moved to Exchange 2010 and decided to balance the exchange > >> servers behind haproxy. We?re currently running haproxy on an old Dell > >> server with a Pentium D 915 2.8GHz and we?re starting to pin the CPU now > >> that most users have migrated to Exchange 2010. > > > > > > Are your balancers handling SSL as well, or are you just using HAProxy > > in TCP mode? > > What kind of numbers do you see for concurrent connections and traffic? > > > > I'm not sure if I can compare with the hardware you're currently on, > > but I do have HAProxy in front of some Exchange2010 servers running in > > our VMware infrastructure (I'm not sure of the hardware at the > > moment). > > > > > > > > -jim > > > > Hi, > > Virtualization layer has usually an impact on performance.
I second Baptiste on this. Most often for high network traffic, an old physical server is better than a new virtual one. That said, what's your load in terms of bitrate, connection rate and concurrency ? I would guess that Exchange is not much demanding, but you're saying that a P4 2.8 GHz is stuck, so that seems scary. Such a machine can normally run around 10-12000 connections per second. With proper sysctl tuning, you can achieve 40000 concurrent connections with 2 GB of RAM. Do you have ip_conntrack loaded on that machine ? Default settings are clearly inadapted to server usage and can eat up a lot of CPU. Regards, Willy
