Am 29.12.2018 um 07:41 schrieb Willy Tarreau:
> On Fri, Dec 28, 2018 at 07:55:11PM +0100, Aleksandar Lazic wrote:
>> Well as far as I understood the pdf one of the biggest difference is that
>> Maglev is a distributed system where the consistent hash is for local system.
> No, not at all. The difference is that it's designed for packet processing
> so they have to take care of connection tracking and per-packet processing
> cost. From what I've read in the paper, it could be seen as a subset of
> what we already do :
>   - server weights are not supported in Maglev (and very likely not needed)
>   - slow start is not supported
>   - server insertion/removal can be extremely expensive (O(N^2)) due to the
>     way they need to build the hash table for fast lookup
>   - no possibility for bounded load either
> It's really important to understand the different focus of the algorithm,
> being packet-oriented instead of L7-oriented. This explains a number of
> differences and choices. I think Maglev is excellent for what it does and
> that our mechanism wouldn't be as fast if used on a per-packet basis. But
> conversely, we already do the same and even much more by default because
> we work at a different layer.

I thought I have misunderstood the Idea behind maglev, thanks for clarification.

> Willy


Reply via email to