I again did some testing by settings the params to -p thread_pools=4 -p thread_pool_min=2000 -p thread_pool_max=5000 -p thread_pool_reserve=95
The document says https://varnish-cache.org/docs/trunk/reference/varnishd.html that thread_pool_reserve is a value from 0 to 95. It's working fine on one of our two servers which have less load (300 req/s) than the primaray one (> 800req/s). On the primary one you can see decreasing the client.req in varnishstat two seconds after restarting hitch with H/2 enabled. It jumps from 100req/s to 1700req/s from one second to the next. -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Dridi Boukelmoune [mailto:[email protected]] Gesendet: Freitag, 21. September 2018 10:56 An: Winkelmann, Thomas (RADIO TELE FFH - Online) Cc: varnish-misc Betreff: Re: Varnish VMods for Version 6.1? On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 3:51 PM Winkelmann, Thomas (RADIO TELE FFH - Online) <[email protected]> wrote: > > Just tested these values. Varnish is nearly dead after restarting with these > new values. Only a few requests will be served. I think, we have to wait :) I guess now would be a good time to bring back h2load. If you increase thread_pool_min to 2000 (a value that shouldn't be unreasonable) that brings the thread_pool_reserve to 400, so even if I didn't bump it further to 500 it'd be in the same ballpark. And if that is enough to bring Varnish to a crawl we may have a deeper problem here. As a general rule of thumb we recommend a thread_pool_min sized for high (for a given definition of high, let's say above average) traffic so that sudden peaks of traffic wouldn't wait too long for threads to be created. I don't see why that should become a problem with Varnish 6 :-/ Dridi RADIO / TELE FFH GmbH & Co. Betriebs-KG FFH-Platz 1, 61111 Bad Vilbel HRA - Nr. 26092 Frankfurt/Main USt.IdNr. DE 112152620 Geschäftsführer / Programmdirektor: Hans-Dieter Hillmoth _______________________________________________ varnish-misc mailing list [email protected] https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc
