On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 2:22 PM, Saurab t <[email protected]> wrote: > Apologies, here is the information; > > > METAL SERVER > Kernel : 2.6.32-431.el6.x86_64 > OS: Centos 6.5 > Ram : 32073 > CPU : > Architecture: x86_64 > CPU op-mode(s): 32-bit, 64-bit > Byte Order: Little Endian > CPU(s): 24 > On-line CPU(s) list: 0-23 > Thread(s) per core: 2 > Core(s) per socket: 6 > Socket(s): 2 > NUMA node(s): 2 > Vendor ID: GenuineIntel > CPU family: 6 > Model: 62 > Stepping: 4 > CPU MHz: 2099.992 > BogoMIPS: 4199.40 > Virtualization: VT-x > L1d cache: 32K > L1i cache: 32K > L2 cache: 256K > L3 cache: 15360K > NUMA node0 CPU(s): 0-5,12-17 > NUMA node1 CPU(s): 6-11,18-23 > > --- > NIC : Speed: 1000Mb/s and Duplex: Full [each public and private ] total : > 2GiGs > >>Also, please remove this statement: > >option http-server-close > >>replace by the two following ones: > >option http-keep-alive > >option prefer-last-server > > Any Specific Reason for it. Kindly let us know reason to replace.
We're still missing a screenshot of your stats page when HAProxy is running at 100% of CPU... Note: your CPU is quite slow ! Have you disabled iptables, irqbalance, pin your network interrupts and HAProxy to different CPU cores???? also, I've heard that some people get much better performance from centos 7.x, thanks to its kernel 3.10... concerning http-keep-alive and prefer-last-server, these options instruct HAProxy to keep connections opened on the server side for a specific client traffic. In such case, there will be much less small packets on the network and no need to close and open connections between each HTTP request. You should get much better performance, but it depends on your traffic pattern. Baptiste > > > On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 6:30 PM, Baptiste <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 1:37 PM, Saurab t <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > Hello Willy, >> > >> > Thanks you for your kind response. >> > >> > Here are the information required :::: >> > >> > Haproxy version : >> > HA-Proxy version 1.5.8 2014/10/31 >> > Copyright 2000-2014 Willy Tarreau <[email protected]> >> > >> > >> > >> > If this can help As you have already responded to two other scenarios : >> > >> > http://www.serverphorums.com/read.php?10,1075864 >> > >> > http://t55696.web-haproxy.webtalks.info/100-cpu-load-t55696.html >> > >> > how can we "exactly" trace if we have issue similar. >> > >> > ELSE : >> > >> > Attached is the haproxy config. Kindly guide us. Thanks a lot in >> > advance. >> > >> > Even small suggestions are very much appreciated. >> > >> > Thanks & Regards >> > Saurab >> > >> > >> > >> > On 3/19/2015 12:33 PM, Willy Tarreau wrote: >> > >> > Hello, >> > >> > On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 11:04:54AM +0530, Saurabh Tiwari wrote: >> > >> > Hello, >> > >> > we are facing issue of haproxy consuming 100% CPU , we tried different >> > tunings on haproxy cfg . But only solution remains is of making the >> > nbproc > 1, which is not a permanent solution. >> > >> > _Pasting the common config section:_ >> > global >> > maxconn 280000 >> > nbproc 1 >> > user haproxy >> > group haproxy >> > chroot /var/lib/haproxy >> > stats socket /var/run/haproxy.sock >> > >> > defaults >> > mode http >> > balance roundrobin >> > >> > maxconn 275000 >> > timeout connect 5000 >> > timeout server 50000 >> > timeout client 50000 >> > >> > timeout http-keep-alive 5s >> > timeout http-request 15s >> > >> > retries 3 >> > option redispatch >> > option abortonclose >> > option tcp-smart-accept >> > option tcp-smart-connect >> > #option splice-auto >> > >> > listen stats self.prv:x0x0x >> > stats enable >> > stats uri / >> > >> > Your config is truncated, you only list the stats page, I guess you're >> > not running at 100% with a stats page only, so would you please post >> > your complete config (remove any password or sensitive info, hide IP >> > addresses if you wish). >> > >> > Please also give some information such as the request and/or connection >> > rate, traffic type (mostly SSL, etc). >> > >> > Kindly suggest, any solution possible. We need fix badly , do not wish >> > to migrate to nginx just for this reason. >> > >> > That doesn't make sense, if you switch from one product to another every >> > time you're facing a configuration problem, you can switch often! If you >> > need features that you only find in nginx, sure you'd rather switch, but >> > if the features you need are in haproxy, in general you should get >> > better >> > performance here so switching will make the situation worse. >> > >> > Willy >> > >> > >> >> >> >> You have not given any hints about your environment... I mean VM, hw, >> details on cpu/ram/nic, etc... >> >> Also, please remove this statement: >> option http-server-close >> >> replace by the two following ones: >> option http-keep-alive >> option prefer-last-server >> >> Baptiste > >
