Fair Proxy Balancer

David Pratt fairwinds at eastlink.ca
Fri Feb 1 01:31:48 MSK 2008

Hi Grzegorz. This gives me a much better idea of what to expect. Thank 
you for this. I am curious whether you have you done anything in the way 
of comparing the effectiveness of the fair proxy balancer to other 
balancing schemes like haproxy or lvm. Speed is a big factor for 
deployments so hoping speed will be good with the simplicity that this 
option presents. Many thanks.


Grzegorz Nosek wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 01:29:32PM -0400, David Pratt wrote:
>> Hi Grzegorz. I appreciate your explanation. It would be more convenient 
>> to compile as an option since I am using an automated build process. If 
>> it is self contained, can you forsee any problems building with most 
>> current 0.5.x branch or is this strictly 0.6.x? Also, what is the 
>> request threshold that triggers the issue with round robin issue that I 
>> am aware. Many thanks.
> The module works with 0.5.x as well as 0.6.x (if it doesn't work for
> you, please mail me with a bug report).
> There's no threshold per se, it's just that the original load balancer
> directs requests strictly round robin, i.e. 0-1-2-3-0-1-2-3 etc. This
> ensures that every backend gets the same number of requests.
> upstream_fair always starts from backend 0 and works its way up until it
> finds an idle peer (more or less). If your load effectively uses a
> single backend at one time, it'll always be backend 0. If it uses the
> power of two backends, they'll be 0 and 1 etc. Thus the first backend
> will always have the most requests served, the second one will have more
> than the third etc.
> Best regards,
>  Grzegorz Nosek

More information about the nginx mailing list