Fair Proxy Balancer
fairwinds at eastlink.ca
Wed Feb 6 17:07:08 MSK 2008
Hi Rob. This is encouraging news and I am working on a setup to
incorporate this into my process. I would really like to hear if there
has been any attempt to evaluate the fair proxy balancer in relation to
other balancing schemes. From the standpoint of server resources, it is
attractive and much simpler than the haproxy or lvm for setup. I realize
speed is subject to all sorts of additional parameters but a comparison
of the balancer with others would be quite interesting.
Rob, can you elaborate a bit more on your mongrels situation. I do not
use ruby but have a similar situation other types of backend servers. In
the current scenario, the last server will always get less hits. Are you
setting some sort of threshold to determine how many mongrels to run (or
just starting up mongrels until the last is getting no hits). Many thanks.
Rob Mitzel wrote:
> Hey Grzegorz,
> First, actually thank YOU for coming up with the balancer. It's made my
> life much easier. And please, keep the round-robin behaviour as-is! I
> mean, it's a great way to tell if you're running too many mongrels and/or
> too many nginx connections.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-nginx at sysoev.ru [mailto:owner-nginx at sysoev.ru] On Behalf Of
> Grzegorz Nosek
> Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 8:46 AM
> To: nginx at sysoev.ru
> Subject: Re: Fair Proxy Balancer
> One known issue (again, waiting for the One Day) is that the round-robin
> part doesn't work too well. E.g. if your load is very low, all requests
> will go to the first backend. Anyway, I'll keep the current behaviour as
> an option as it may be useful in dimensioning your backend cluster (i.e.
> if the Nth backend has serviced no requests, N-1 should be enough).
> Best regards,
> Grzegorz Nosek
More information about the nginx