I think I know what is wrong with HAProxy. HAProxy balance TCP connections.
HTTP client creates 2 TCP connections and keeps them after data transferred. nginx may have 1000 connections in front and 200 connections in backend. HAProxy with 1000 connections in front will have 1000 connections in backend. May be I am too optimistic about nginx but it is what nginx and lighttpd do when they have FastCGI in backend. On Jun 16, 4:25 pm, Frédéric Sidler <[email protected]> wrote: > This is a question for the scalr dev team. > > There are many LB solution, Perlbal, HAProxy, Nginx. Except the fact that > Nginx can serve static files, why was Nginx chosen between all the Load > Balancer solution. > > I have never used HAProxy before. I was used to use Perlbal until Scalr came > out. But with performance issues we are dealing with, some friends point me > to this blog post and tell me that HAProxy could eventually solve some of > them. As I can see algorithms of HAProxy seem to be more evolved than the > simple round robin algorithm of > Nginx.http://affectioncode.wordpress.com/2008/06/11/comparing-nginx-and-hap... > > The advantage of Nginx and HAProxy over Perlbal is that they can deal with > HTTPS which is not the case of Perlbal. > > Thank you very much for the explanation of the choice and if an HAProxy > image would make sense. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "scalr-discuss" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/scalr-discuss?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
