Re: [dnsdist] dnsdist performance

Hi Remi! Am 14.08.2019 um 10:39 schrieb Remi Gacogne: > Hi Klaus, > > On 8/13/19 9:31 PM, Klaus Darilion wrote: >> My results were: >> 1 VM with 4vCPUs. The VM runs NSD and PDNS/PGSQL. DNSDIST forwards some >> zones to NSD, others to PDNS/PGSQL >> >> PDNS with cached responses: 40.000 q/s >> PDNS

Re: [dnsdist] dnsdist performance

Hi Gentian, On 8/12/19 10:20 AM, Gentian Bajraktari wrote: > Just did, its showing on metronome: Gentian-DNSDIST-TEST Thank you, I see it! Unfortunately it looks like your test was quite short and metronome reduces the precision after a few hours so I'm not sure I see the whole picture, but it lo

Re: [dnsdist] dnsdist performance

Hi Klaus, On 8/13/19 9:31 PM, Klaus Darilion wrote: > My results were: > 1 VM with 4vCPUs. The VM runs NSD and PDNS/PGSQL. DNSDIST forwards some > zones to NSD, others to PDNS/PGSQL > > PDNS with cached responses: 40.000 q/s > PDNS random labels: 9.000 q/s > NSD: 65.000 q/s > > 1. dnsdist with s

Re: [dnsdist] dnsdist performance

Hi Remi! Am 11.08.2019 um 18:26 schrieb Remi Gacogne: > Hi Klaus, > > On 8/10/19 10:30 PM, Klaus Darilion wrote: >> I had similar results. Starting 4 listening threads and 4 receivers >> threads (by adding the same backend 4 times) boosted my performance - >> almost linear. > > Similar in terms

Re: [dnsdist] dnsdist performance

Just did, its showing on metronome: Gentian-DNSDIST-TEST On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 10:16, Remi Gacogne wrote: > Hi Gentian, > > On 8/12/19 10:12 AM, Gentian Bajraktari wrote: > > I have attached results from resperf ( latest compiled, 2.3.1) and the > > configuration file (dnsdist.conf) > > Would y

Re: [dnsdist] dnsdist performance

Hi Gentian, On 8/12/19 10:12 AM, Gentian Bajraktari wrote: > I have attached results from resperf ( latest compiled, 2.3.1) and the > configuration file (dnsdist.conf) Would you consider sending metrics to our public metronome server [1] so we understand what's the limiting factor during your tes

Re: [dnsdist] dnsdist performance

I have attached results from resperf ( latest compiled, 2.3.1) and the configuration file (dnsdist.conf) On Sat, 10 Aug 2019 at 22:30, Klaus Darilion wrote: > Am 08.08.2019 um 10:20 schrieb Gentian Bajraktari: > > Dear Dnsdist community, > > > > we are trying to setup dnsdist as a loadbalancer

Re: [dnsdist] dnsdist performance

Hi Klaus i have tried with adding listeners as well as adding same Bind server again, but results are the same, its very strange, i get better results hitting directly one Bind server rather then Dnsdist with 8 listerners and 8 servers ( 4 x Bind1 and 4x Bind2), and i have no other logic/routing/

Re: [dnsdist] dnsdist performance

Hi Klaus, On 8/10/19 10:30 PM, Klaus Darilion wrote: > I had similar results. Starting 4 listening threads and 4 receivers > threads (by adding the same backend 4 times) boosted my performance - > almost linear. Similar in terms of QPS as well? I just tested master on Arch using calidns and dumre

Re: [dnsdist] dnsdist performance

Am 08.08.2019 um 10:20 schrieb Gentian Bajraktari: Dear Dnsdist community, we are trying to setup dnsdist as a loadbalancer for 2 bind recursive cache only servers, we have done a very simple setup: addLocal("DNSDIST_IP") newServer({address="BIND_IP1"}) newServer({address=" BIND_IP2"}) setSer

Re: [dnsdist] dnsdist performance

Hi Remi, yes all servers are on VMware, 8 cpu, 8G Ram. OS is Centos ( Linux release 7.6.1810 (Core) 3.10.0-957.27.2.el7.x86_64) have disabled selinux and all firewall/iptables, performance on Bind (BIND 9.14.4 (Stable Release)) directly is 50-60K QPS sorry for the typo, i have tried setMaxUDPO

Re: [dnsdist] dnsdist performance

Please keep replying to the mailing-list instead of replying to me directly, as your answers might help others. I have not included your message because I'm not sure what you expected to share publicly, but we only do non-public support for customers [1]. Would you consider sending metrics to our

Re: [dnsdist] dnsdist performance

Hi Gentian, On 8/8/19 10:20 AM, Gentian Bajraktari wrote: > but when we test with resperf (from dnsperf tool), the results are very > bad for DNSDIST, around 5-15K QPS , while when we test directly to one > of BIND ip addresses the QPS goes up to 50-60Qps. Those are very low numbers, for dnsdist

Re: [dnsdist] dnsdist performance

Hi Nico, On 06/19/2018 10:42 PM, Nico wrote: > We upgraded to 1.3, everything fine. > Redid our test with the following results: > # procs  # listeners kq/s > > % no error >

Re: [dnsdist] dnsdist performance

Just a follow-up on this. We upgraded to 1.3, everything fine. Redid our test with the following results: # procs # listenerskq/s % no error

Re: [dnsdist] dnsdist performance

Hi Remi, Yes, the new version was almost 30% better in the full config test. Great! > So quite a noticeable gain but it looks like lock contention is still an > issue. I would like to understand why, if you don't mind answering a few > questions. > > - You mentioned having 32 cores, are they real

Re: [dnsdist] dnsdist performance

Hi Nico, On 04/05/2017 12:24 AM, Nico wrote: > Test with rule REFUSED: > dnsdist from rpm: ~450 Kqps > dnsdist-concur: ~530kqps > 17% improvement I guess that's the move from CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW to CLOCK_MONOTONIC, quite impressive. > Test with answer from cache: > 1 dnsdist from rpm 12 list

Re: [dnsdist] dnsdist performance

We re-run the tests with concur. The result were better: Test with rule drop: no noticeable change, around 650kqps, guess this is network or stack limit Test with rule REFUSED: dnsdist from rpm: ~450 Kqps dnsdist-concur: ~530kqps 17% improvement Test with answer from cache: 1 dnsdist from rpm

Re: [dnsdist] dnsdist performance

On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 05:44:06PM -0300, Nico wrote: > Hi! > > Thanks for answering!. > I'm not pretending to be anonymous. > Mi name is Nicolas Baumgarten and I do infrastructure support . Hi, welcome! Thanks. > One dnsdist process, whith 12 listeners, small cache, and all cached queries > can

Re: [dnsdist] dnsdist performance

Hi! Thanks for answering!. I'm not pretending to be anonymous. Mi name is Nicolas Baumgarten and I do infrastructure support . I really appreciate your work. And hope to help. Will try your suggestion with the version from repository. Our results are those which I've send in the initial mail.

Re: [dnsdist] dnsdist performance

Hello "Nico Mail", Thank you for contacting us anonymously. My name is Bert Hubert and we work very hard to provide fast software for you, for free. Could you try this branch: git clone -b dnsdist-concur https://github.com/ahupowerdns/pdns.git cd pdns/pdns/dnsdistdist autoreconf -i ./configure

Re: [dnsdist] dnsdist performance

Hi, thanks for you fast reply, but i think that setMaxUDPOutstanding relates to queries pending from backend servers to dnsdist. My tests are almost all serviced from cache. On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 4:42 PM, Aleš Rygl wrote: > > > We can't get more than 120/150 kqps > > We don't think it's netwo

Re: [dnsdist] dnsdist performance

> We can't get more than 120/150 kqps > We don't think it's network related, and doesn't seem to be interface or > udp stack. Hi, I was struggling with some packet loss some time ago. There was a packet loss in the output of netstat -su command. Finally I was advised to increase to use setMa