On Sat, Apr 21, 2018 at 03:35:02PM +0300, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: > On Sat, Apr 21, 2018 at 01:49:37PM +0300, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: > > > On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 09:01:24PM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: > > > So between these two the traffic is perfectly balanced. I don't see why > > > you > > > wouldn't have other threads :-/ > > > > > > Well, let's try something. In your global section you have a "stats > > > socket ..." > > > with a path. Please replicate this line to have 8 more of them, all with a > > > different path (eg: /var/run/haproxy-stats becomes haproxy-stats1, > > > -stats2 etc) > > > and with a different thread binding using "process" like this : > > > > > > stats socket /var/run/haproxy-stats1 level admin process 1/1 > > > stats socket /var/run/haproxy-stats2 level admin process 1/2 > > > stats socket /var/run/haproxy-stats3 level admin process 1/3 > > > ... > > > stats socket /var/run/haproxy-stats8 level admin process 1/8 > > > > > > Then you can use the same command as above to dump exactly one thread's > > > activity by connecting to each of these sockets. We definitely need to > > > understand what the other threads are doing. > > > > Ok, I am need run haproxy some time for data collected. > > CPU 0 busy 0.157 > CPU 1 busy 0.152 > CPU 2 busy 0.310 > CPU 3 busy 0.066 > CPU 4 busy 1.000 > CPU 5 busy 0.121 > CPU 6 busy 0.192 > CPU 7 busy 0.113 (...)
> thread_id: 0 > loops: 66424562 83705569 78330851 71825493 4167226792 55628229 71817734 > 60724445 > stream: 10509732 11021411 25600986 2691749 42283170 7046275 14032863 6425591 OK, sorry I was confused, in fact each column above correspond to one distinct thread. As you can see it's obvious that there are huge differences between each one. So above we can see that thread 4 received many more requests than the other ones. The number of loops is huge, just as if it did never sleep. Comparing thread 2 to threads 0 and 1 shows that the CPU usage is more logical (ie: twice the number of stream, twice the CPU load). Don't you have anything specificly bound to thread 4 in your config ? Or do you know if your network interrupts would happen to be bound to CPU 4 and possibly cause this important imbalance ? Thanks, Willy
