Please check the ssl_haproxy.cfg .We have defined max value as below
global
maxconn 20000
maxconnrate 15000
On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 2:03 PM, Marcin Deranek <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, 4 Oct 2016 10:55:08 +0530
> Rajesh Mahajan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Please find attached configuration files for both nginx and haproxy.
> > Could you please share your results wrt to nginx and tell me which
> > http benchmark tool you are using for testing.
>
> From what I see you did not specify maxconn limit in defaults
> nor frontend sections, so effectively you will be limited to 2000
> concurrent connections on frontend (we run into this problem during our
> tests).
>
> Due to the fact that we needed to test our setup up to 10Gb/s we had to
> build our own tools as currently available scaled "only" up to ~2-3Gb/s. We
> used multi-threaded tools like wrk2, httpress (with some patches) and
> weighttp as a starting point and build scripts around them to aggregate
> data from multiple machines running those. I started to prefer httpress
> (with some patches) as it allows to test keepalive/non-keepalive
> connections (as opposite to wrk2). On the other hand wrk2 has some nice
> Lua scripting capabilities which might be useful in certain scenarios
> like replaying traffic.
>
> Unfortunately right now I cannot find any "trustworthy" results we have
> obtained while comparing HAProxy and nginx. During our testing we
> discovered that Nginx does not scale linearly when increasing amount of
> workers - it was even worse: increasing amount of workers degraded
> performance. Later this problem was mitigated, but not completely
> resolved resulting up to 20% performance degradation with 24
> cores/workers running. Proper fix would require significant
> architectural changes of Nginx, so we were left only with a workaround.
> Overall HAProxy and nginx were comparable (HAProxy still faster), but
> due to above bug nginx was visibly behind when number of workers
> increased. When we decided to use HAProxy our focus moved towards
> tuning HAProxy rather than comparing HAProxy and nginx. We have some
> data on our Wiki from time when we compared HAProxy and nginx, but
> setup and performance isn't nowhere near what we currently use/get
> (Those benchmarks did not use our distributed benchmark infrastructure
> to obtain results, so effectively they were limited to 1Gb/s of traffic
> due to network interface throughput).
> Regards,
>
> Marcin
>
