On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 07:26:25AM -0200, Fred Pedrisa wrote:
> > OK. The last point could slightly help in reducing the number of calls to
> kqueue and aggregate more events at once. But FreeBSD's kqueue is really
> fast so that should not change much. You really need to be able to pin the
> proce
> OK. The last point could slightly help in reducing the number of calls to
kqueue and aggregate more events at once. But FreeBSD's kqueue is really
fast so that should not change much. You really need to be able to pin the
processes to certain CPUs, as well as the interrupts. Unfortunately I canno
On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 12:31:40AM -0200, Fred Pedrisa wrote:
> Hey, Willy.
>
> I've switch to haproxy 1.5 (last one available on the website), but the
> results didn't change much.
>
> However, I didn't try to run all the proxies in just one single process, to
> check the difference yet.
OK. Th
...@hotmail.com]
Enviada em: terça-feira, 5 de novembro de 2013 13:33
Para: 'Willy Tarreau'
Cc: 'Lukas Tribus'; 'haproxy@formilux.org'
Assunto: RES: RES: RES: RES: RES: RES: RES: RES: High CPU Usage (HaProxy)
> OK. Do you know if you have a single or multiple interr
I ran a haproxy(nbproc=6) on freebsd 10-beta2, each frontend bind to a
socket and share the same backend. Context switch normally 60k+. But the load
and throughput is confused me, in the past days I ran a haproxy instance
(nbproc=1), it can handle up to 500Mbps traffic .
The info below
On 05 нояб. 2013 г., at 19:33, Fred Pedrisa wrote:
>
> However, in FreeBSD we can't do that IRQ Assigning, like we can on linux.
> (As far I know).
>
JFYI: you can assign IRQs to CPUs via cpuset -x
(I can’t tell you if it is “like on linux” or not though).
> OK. Do you know if you have a single or multiple interrupts on your NICs,
and if they're delivered to a single core, multiple cores, or floating
around more or less randomly ?
This is managed by FreeBSD, it currently have multiple queues and irq
balance with msix.
> It seems that your numbers b
7 matches
Mail list logo
