[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [K12OSN] OT: Routing issue



It is a CoyotePoint 350.  This is a test phase, unfortunately it is a
flat network...


On 5/19/07, "Terrell Prudé Jr." <microman cmosnetworks com> wrote:

 It sounds like you're using the "direct routing" method vs. the "NAT
routing" method.  There's nothing wrong with using the "direct routing"
algorithm; that actually can reduce the load on the load balancer by quite a
bit.  Just this week, I set up a load balancer as a proof-of-concept, using
NAT routing.  On a Pentium 4  box running at 2.8GHz, I was able to push
320.3Mbps through the new CentOS 5's LVS, which consumed just under 70% CPU.
 Granted, that's not a small amount of traffic, and it actually does serve
our needs at work very well, but it would've been even larger had I used
direct routing.

 What kind of load balancer are you using?

 --TP

_______________________________
 Do you GNU!?
 Microsoft Free since 2003--the ultimate antivirus protection!


 Timothy Legge wrote:
Hi

 I am trying to setup a load balancer to balance two apache servers.
 The trouble is that the load balancer, client and apache servers are
 on one (test).  The client contacts the load balance which goes to the
 apache server but the apache server responds directly to the client.

 I know it is a routing issue but I cannot seem to make Linux route all
 local network trafic to the load balance.  Any ideas?

 Tim

 _______________________________________________
 K12OSN mailing list
 K12OSN redhat com
 https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn
 For more info see <http://www.k12os.org>

_______________________________________________
K12OSN mailing list
K12OSN redhat com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn
For more info see <http://www.k12os.org>



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]