Re: weights
Thanks. Am talking about the weights , if one server (x) assigned with weight 125 and other server (y) with weight 12 ( added twice in the file) , we see x is getting half of the traffic compared to y. that means weigt has no affects here? On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 12:15 PM, Willy Tarreau w...@1wt.eu wrote: On Sat, Mar 01, 2014 at 11:06:32PM +0530, vijeesh vijayan wrote: Thanks. will share screenshot shortly. roundrobin recommented for mysql also? What Baptiste is explaining is that leastconn focuses on balancing the number of established connections and not the cumulated number of connections. If one server responds slowly and the other responds fast, the slow one will always have a certain number of open connections while the fast one will have very few. Thus it is normal that haproxy will pick the fast one more often than the slow one. And this is precisely the purpose of leastconn. Some people use leastconn to avoid servers which are suffering from some local system perturbations (eg: backups). And in general, what you're observing means exactly that one server is working much better than another one. So round robin will equally distribute the number of requests to your servers, but will degrade the quality of service since the slow one will get more requests than right now, and the fast one will remain mostly idle waiting for the slow one to get its share. Willy -- = Vijeesh K The temptation to quit will be greatest just before you are about to succeed
Re: weights
This distribution happens only when server x and y has same number of open connections? On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 3:10 PM, Willy Tarreau w...@1wt.eu wrote: On Tue, Mar 04, 2014 at 02:20:32PM +0530, vijeesh vijayan wrote: Thanks. Am talking about the weights , if one server (x) assigned with weight 125 and other server (y) with weight 12 ( added twice in the file) , we see x is getting half of the traffic compared to y. that means weigt has no affects here? Yes it does affect it. In leastconn, the weight affects the number of concurrent connections. So if a server has a weight of 125 and another one of 2, then haproxy will ensure that the first one has 125/127 connections while the second has 2/127 connections. But again, these are *concurrent* connections, not cumulated connections. Willy -- = Vijeesh K The temptation to quit will be greatest just before you are about to succeed
Re: weights
Thanks. please check my last reply Thanks. Am talking about the weights , if one server (x) assigned with weight 125 and other server (y) with weight 12 ( added twice in the file) , we see x is getting half of the traffic compared to y. that means weigt has no affects here? in this case , server x should be getting 5 folds of connections of y ideally. but something is preventing this . Am i right? in our case x is getting only 50 percent of y ( we are calculating the number of connections/sec) . how do we know how many connections haproxy keep it open for a particular server? On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 7:52 PM, Willy Tarreau w...@1wt.eu wrote: On Tue, Mar 04, 2014 at 07:50:04PM +0530, vijeesh vijayan wrote: This distribution happens only when server x and y has same number of open connections? no, the distribution happens all the time. To make it simpler to understand, imagine that you have weight=1 for all servers. Haproxy will then try to balance the established connections so that all servers have the same number. Now if one server has weight 2, haproxy will try to load it with twice the number of connections as the first one. And so on... That's why leastconn is normally used with long-lived connections (eg: RDP, LDAP, SQL, ...). Willy -- = Vijeesh K The temptation to quit will be greatest just before you are about to succeed
Re: weights
Thanks. will share screenshot shortly. roundrobin recommented for mysql also? On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 3:22 PM, Baptiste bed...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, this may be due to your load-balancing algorithm and the speed of your servers. leastconn applies to currently established connections, not to number of connections established per second. could you enable haproxy stats page and share us (or to me directly) a screenshot of it? You could give a try to 'balance roundrobin' and see what happens. Baptiste On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 9:41 AM, vijeesh vijayan vijeeshk.vija...@gmail.com wrote: we are using haproxy (1.4)to distribute traffic to 30 of our db nodes. we are facing an issue with weights. sample configs = defaults mode tcp retries2 option redispatch maxconn256000 timeoutconnect 10s timeoutclient10s timeoutserver10s log global option dontlognull listen newone :4000 mode tcp balance leastconn option mysql-check user abcd serverx.x.x.3:3306 weight 125 check inter 3s rise 2 fall 2 server y.com x.x.x.4:3306 weight 12 check inter 3s rise 2 fall 2 server y.com x.x.x.4:3306 weight 12 check inter 3s rise 2 fall 2 = issue is we are getting only 150qps on server x.com even with weight 125. but on y.com we are getting 500qps with a weight of 12 , but mentioned twice. can you explain why it is so? -- = Vijeesh K The temptation to quit will be greatest just before you are about to succeed -- = Vijeesh K The temptation to quit will be greatest just before you are about to succeed
weights
we are using haproxy (1.4)to distribute traffic to 30 of our db nodes. we are facing an issue with weights. sample configs = defaults mode tcp retries2 option redispatch maxconn256000 timeoutconnect 10s timeoutclient10s timeoutserver10s log global option dontlognull listen newone :4000 mode tcp balance leastconn option mysql-check user abcd serverx.x.x.3:3306 weight 125 check inter 3s rise 2 fall 2 server y.com x.x.x.4:3306 weight 12 check inter 3s rise 2 fall 2 server y.com x.x.x.4:3306 weight 12 check inter 3s rise 2 fall 2 = issue is we are getting only 150qps on server x.com even with weight 125. but on y.com we are getting 500qps with a weight of 12 , but mentioned twice. can you explain why it is so? -- = Vijeesh K The temptation to quit will be greatest just before you are about to succeed
