I'm not familiar enough w/ the code, but why is it that it only affects people that aren't using session tracking? I currently use the IP based session tracking.
How can you find out what you current connection limit is with one's particular installation of pound? Is there any good benchmarking software that anyone could recommend? I haven't run into this problem (yet), but I'd rather avoid if it I can. --Alfonso -----Original Message----- From: Robert Segall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 22, 2008 11:38 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Pound Mailing List] reusing connections to backends On Sat, 2008-09-13 at 14:55 -0400, Albert wrote: > Couple of weeks ago I noticed that pound was not reusing open/existing > connections to the backend, even when backend is supporting HTTP/1.1 > and has content length. To be precise, this happens when a service > has multiple backends, with no session-tracking enable. This means > that if a client is making a request for a page, and then make > subsequent requests for images/javascript/css etc (on existing > connection to pound), pound will not always use the open connection to backend. > Here's how the requests are currently handled (assume 2 backends): > > request#1 -> pound (randomly select a backend & connect to it) -> > backend#1. Send response back -- but don't close either the client or > backend if both support HTTP/1.1 and have Content-Length. > request#2 -> pound. Pound will randomly select a backend. If its > backend#1, it will reuse the open connection, from first request. If > not, it will close connection to backend#1, and open a new connection > to backend#2. Send request to backend#2, receive response & send it back. > request#3 > same path as request#2 > > > You can see, pound, with the client connection which is asking for all > of the content, will randomly look for a backend, and close the > existing backend connection, if a backend has changed, and open a > connection to a new backend. > > I was a bit surprised by this behavior, and was wondering if pound > should be changed to try to reuse the backend connection (assuming > backend is still alive) before trying to find a new backend. I > understand that I can change the behavior by introducing > Session-tracking (say by IP address), which would force pound to reuse > the backend. But I would think that pound will run faster if it didn't > have to close and then open new connections to backend when > Session-tracking is not used. > > Any thoughts? We'll look at the possibility of optimising this for randomly assigned back-ends. In the meantime (for all list members): how many people could benefit from it? -- ?Robert Segall Apsis GmbH Postfach, Uetikon am See, CH-8707 Tel: +41-44-920 4904 -- To unsubscribe send an email with subject unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by SecureMail, and is believed to be clean. -- To unsubscribe send an email with subject unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions.
