Hi Willy, Elias, On 08:33 Fri 09 Dec , Willy Tarreau wrote: > On Thu, Dec 01, 2016 at 02:53:25PM +0100, Elias Abacioglu wrote: > > # Should I use core 0 on each CPU for backends (proc 1+15) or should > > I > > use core 1(proc 2+16)? > > Backends are processed on the same CPU as the frontend which passes them > the traffic, so the bind-process has no effect there. In fact bind-process > on a backend means "at least on these processes". > > That's why it's better to proceed like this (stupid numbers, just so that > you get the idea): > > listen ssl-offload > bind-proess 2-50 > bind :443 ssl .... process 2 > ... > bind :443 ssl .... process 50
I wonder if a `per-process' keyword would make sense here. I find bind :443 ssl .... per-process more concise than 15 or 20 individual bind lines. This would have the same effect as N bind lines, one for each process in the bind-process list. > server clear 127.0.0.1:1 send-proxy-v2 > > frontend clear > bind-process 1 > bind 127.0.0.1:1 accept-proxy Would you recommend using unix sockets for process-to-process communication, at least to get rid of the TCP state overhead? Regards, Apollon
