Hi, On Thu, Oct 25, 2007 at 04:25:30PM +0200, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote: > On 2007-10-25T13:11:56, Dejan Muhamedagic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > The network is fully virtual, so I can't be hitting that limit. > > Probably your xen is better than mine. Here I have a transfer > > rate (guest to host) at times around 10mbit. > > Paravirtualized is quite fast. I also don't connect my Xen network to > the external NIC (which is the default), but use a decoupled internal > bridged network, which is quite a bit faster, and also doesn't flood my > LAN ;-) > > I couldn't figure it out myself, but it is described easily here: > http://en.opensuse.org/Xen3_and_a_Virtual_Network > > With scp (and that includes encryption) I get ~35 MB/s between the > DomU and Dom0. Certainly plenty for logging.
Thanks. I'll give it a try. > > > As a data point: I was experiencing the very same drop message rate and > > > doubled the buffers on syslog-ng and logd then; no change. > > > > > > Any suggestions? > > > > Remember this one: > > http://lists.linux-ha.org/pipermail/linux-ha-dev/2007-April/014378.html > > I remember this, but I'm not quite sure I see how this relates to a > performance issue. In fact it doesn't. It's just that that comes up first as soon as somebody mentions ha_logd. I must've been really impressed. > CTS wasn't missing any of the patterns it was looking for), but that I > was getting a _lot_ of noise from heartbeat's messaging core / > flow-control during the message spikes. > http://hg.linux-ha.org/dev/rev/69f0395c2ead seems to fix some of this > for me. > > Now I do get lost packets on the wire, but heartbeat retransmits nicely, > so nothing actually seems to go wrong ... > > Probably this means that MAXMISSING and FLOWCONTROL_LIMIT might require > tuning. Since both directly depend on MAXMSGHIST, I guess that it should be OK as it is. > It'd be so much nicer if the messaging core was slightly more > adaptive, but as we're moving towards openAIS, I'm not sure whether > that's worth investigating in too much detail. You mean something like setting MAXMSGHIST dynamically, depending on the size of the cluster? At first it doesn't look difficult, but it would of course involve more dynamic memory allocations. Thanks, Dejan > Regards, > Lars > > -- > Teamlead Kernel, SuSE Labs, Research and Development > SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) > "Experience is the name everyone gives to their mistakes." -- Oscar Wilde > > _______________________________________________________ > Linux-HA-Dev: [email protected] > http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev > Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/ _______________________________________________________ Linux-HA-Dev: [email protected] http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
