thanks Willy ! works perfectly.
On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 12:38 AM, Willy Tarreau <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 06:42:58PM +0000, Alon Muchnick wrote: > > hi , > > we have haproxy installed locally on a cluster of servers(centos 5.5 ) > > behind a layer 4 load balancer,all with the same > > configuration file and log setting. > > > > on some servers there is a mismatch between the number of > > session seen in the stats uri and the amount of records in the log file , > > on others the number correlate. > > > > for example on a problematic sever : > > > > (log has been truncated and stats were rested at the same time) > > > > total number of sessions from stats uri : 2111156 > > number of records in log file : 112834 > > > > > > each second the log is increases by about 50 records > > while on a different server with the same load > > each second the log is increases by about 1000 records. > > > > on a correctly working sever : > > total number of sessions from stats uri : 2483449 > > number of records in log file : 2482151 > > > > each second the log is increases by about 1000 records > > the same as the session change rate. > > > > > > can some one might point to the cause of the problem? > > since the haproxy config is the same on all servers , > > i guess the difference is somewhere in the OS level . > > > > below are our log config : > > > > from haproxy config file > > > > global > > log 127.0.0.1 local0 > > .... > > > > defaults > > mode http > > log global > > option httplog > > ..... > > > > from/etc/syslog.conf: > > .. > > *.info;mail.none;authpriv.none;cron.none;local0.none /var/log/messages > > ... > > #save haproxy log > > local0.* /var/log/haproxy.log > > Your syslog server is logging synchronously by default, and very likely it > cannot sync the disk as fast as every log comes in so it's forced to drop > a lot of them. Please prefix the file name with a "-" above to enable async > logging : > > local0.* -/var/log/haproxy.log > > It should fix the problem. Very likely your second server has less disk > activity and is able to cope with the load. > > Regards, > Willy > >
