Re: Unusually high cpu usage after upgrade to 1.5dev17

2013-01-09 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Christian, On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 03:27:11PM +, Christian Becker wrote: > On 09.01.2013, at 14:55, Lukas Tribus wrote: > > > > >> In the mean time i´ve downgraded to the old kernel, but the performances > >> issues persist. So this seems to be a issue in haproxy. > > > > This is very s

RE: Unusually high cpu usage after upgrade to 1.5dev17

2013-01-09 Thread Lukas Tribus
> In the mean time i´ve downgraded to the old kernel, but the performances > issues persist. So this seems to be a issue in haproxy. This is very strange. In your first mail you reported that your CPU is spending 30% in userspace and 70% is system. How is your CPU usage now? You are running the

Re: Unusually high cpu usage after upgrade to 1.5dev17

2013-01-09 Thread Baptiste
The latest dev version is the most stable and best performing for SSL. Do you mandatory need splicing? Can't you simply disable it ?? cheers On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 1:05 PM, Christian Becker wrote: > > On 09.01.2013, at 01:15, Baptiste wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> You should NEVER ever change 2 core s

Re: Unusually high cpu usage after upgrade to 1.5dev17

2013-01-09 Thread Christian Becker
On 09.01.2013, at 01:15, Baptiste wrote: > Hi, > > You should NEVER ever change 2 core stuff in your architecture in the > mean time > First upgrade HAProxy, then later upgrade the kernel So if you > have an issue, it would be easier to track which component triggered > it. > In your ca

Re: Unusually high cpu usage after upgrade to 1.5dev17

2013-01-08 Thread Baptiste
Hi, You should NEVER ever change 2 core stuff in your architecture in the mean time First upgrade HAProxy, then later upgrade the kernel So if you have an issue, it would be easier to track which component triggered it. In your case, it's quite easy, as everybody mentioned, it is the kerne

RE: Unusually high cpu usage after upgrade to 1.5dev17

2013-01-08 Thread Lukas Tribus
> After your suggestion i´ve checked the netdev mailing list > and found an interesting thread created by Willy. > Major network performance regression in 3.7 - > http://marc.info/?t=13574227801&r=1&w=2 > > Since i´m not really aware of kernel programming, i´ll forward my > initial request t

Re: Unusually high cpu usage after upgrade to 1.5dev17

2013-01-08 Thread Christian Becker
Hi Lukas, thanks for the quick reply! On 08.01.2013, at 19:44, Lukas Tribus wrote: > >> Jan 8 18:30:59 srv11 kernel: [ 3878.272003] [ cut here >> ] >> Jan 8 18:30:59 srv11 kernel: [ 3878.295572] WARNING: at net/ipv4/tcp.c:1330 >> tcp_cleanup_rbuf+0x4d/0xfc() >> Jan

RE: Unusually high cpu usage after upgrade to 1.5dev17

2013-01-08 Thread Lukas Tribus
> Jan  8 18:30:59 srv11 kernel: [ 3878.272003] [ cut here > ] > Jan  8 18:30:59 srv11 kernel: [ 3878.295572] WARNING: at net/ipv4/tcp.c:1330 > tcp_cleanup_rbuf+0x4d/0xfc() > Jan  8 18:30:59 srv11 kernel: [ 3878.319107] Hardware name: System x3690 X5 > -[7148Z68]- > Jan 

Re: Unusually high cpu usage after upgrade to 1.5dev17

2013-01-08 Thread Thomas Heil
Hi, On 08.01.2013 19:32, Christian Becker wrote: > Hi Thomas, > > thanks for your quick reply! > >> This looks like your nic cause problems. What nic type is it? > The Server is using Emulex Corporation OneConnect 10Gb NIC (be2net driver). I saw you have nbproc 34 in the global section. Thats re

Re: Unusually high cpu usage after upgrade to 1.5dev17

2013-01-08 Thread Christian Becker
Hi Thomas, thanks for your quick reply! > This looks like your nic cause problems. What nic type is it? The Server is using Emulex Corporation OneConnect 10Gb NIC (be2net driver). > You could easily add something like > VERSION="1.5.dev17-patch..." to make, then you know at every time what >

Re: Unusually high cpu usage after upgrade to 1.5dev17

2013-01-08 Thread Thomas Heil
Hi, On 08.01.2013 18:41, Christian Becker wrote: > Hello, > > today we´ve upgraded one of our loadbalancers to linux kernel 3.7.1 and > haproxy 1.5 dev 17 - coming from kernel 3.0.1 and haproxy 1.5 dev 7. > > After the upgrade, the system is delivering traffic as usual and we don´t see > any tra