reuse/recycle breaks clients on NATed network. I think reuse by itself is dodgy, but generally works OK. recycle is pretty bad.
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 7:17 PM, Jason Price <[email protected]> wrote: > Please expound. > > (in our use case, our backends are all 'local' within the AWS regions, > with less than 1 millisecond RTT (sometimes way less).) > > Our frontend systems are ELBs with similar response times. > > That's a rough approximation of 'LAN' usage, unless I'm missing something. > > --Jason > > > On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 9:30 AM, Per Buer <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Those are probably fine on a LAN for benchmarking but they will not work >> on the internet. >> >> Per. >> >> >> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 3:31 PM, Jason Price <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Private message requesting TCP tuning. For the record, these are >>> draft numbers and very tightly tied to our use case, so they should >>> not be copied blindly. >>> >>> somaxconn is 512 >>> txqueuelen is 5000 >>> netdev_max_backlog is 5000 >>> tcp_max_syn_backlog is 4096 >>> enable tcp_tw_recycle >>> enable tcp_tw_reuse >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 6:45 AM, Γιάννης Καραγιαννίδης >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> > Could you please give us some more information about your >>> > TCP tuning? >>> > Regards >>> > Yiannis >>> > >>> > -----Original Message----- >>> > From: >>> > [email protected][mailto: >>> [email protected]] On >>> Behalf Of Jason Price >>> > Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2014 12:33 AM >>> > To: Norberto Meijome >>> > Cc: [email protected] >>> > Subject: Re: System can't take more than 5k req /sec >>> > >>> > So, through some TCP tuning we've been able to get to 20k/s. Though I >>> needed to get up to 8k threads per pool. >>> > >>> > Many docs say 'Don't go more than 4k threads'. Can someone explain >>> that? Anyone have experience with 8-10k threads? >>> > >>> > --Jason >>> > >>> > On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 10:41 PM, Jason Price <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >> On Tuesday, April 29, 2014, Norberto Meijome <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> Have you ruled out AWS limits? Putting varnish aside for a minute, >>> >>> can you handle 5k/sec TCP conns with something like nginx +static >>> files.? >>> >> >>> >> This is an excellent question. I'll see what kind of answer I'll get >>> to it. >>> >> >>> >> -Jason >>> > >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > varnish-misc mailing list >>> > [email protected] >>> > https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> varnish-misc mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> <http://www.varnish-software.com/> *Per Buer* >> CTO | Varnish Software >> Phone: +47 958 39 117 | Skype: per.buer >> We Make Websites Fly! >> >> Winner of the Red Herring Top 100 Global Award 2013 >> >> >> > -- <http://www.varnish-software.com/> *Per Buer* CTO | Varnish Software Phone: +47 958 39 117 | Skype: per.buer We Make Websites Fly! Winner of the Red Herring Top 100 Global Award 2013
_______________________________________________ varnish-misc mailing list [email protected] https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc
