On 27.09.2011 14:51, John S. wrote:
Any clue ? As this is in production right now, I will have to rollback to Squid if I can not figure it out.
How are you distributing the traffic between your servers? From the bandwidth vs. hits it seems that connections are handled differently, my guess was keepalives lasting longer with Varnish and therefore if your load balancer uses a "least connections" metric or similar, it will simply send more traffic to servers that close connections earlier. Which means that this says nothing about the actual performance of the servers and whether it would get better or worse if you switched all servers to Varnish.
How do the HTTP headers look when coming from Varnish vs. Squid? Perhaps they offer some hints.
Regards, Marinos _______________________________________________ varnish-misc mailing list [email protected] https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc
