Fair Proxy Balancer

David Pratt fairwinds at eastlink.ca
Fri Feb 8 16:49:59 MSK 2008

Hi Ezra. Cool. The setup I am looking at is quite similar so great to 
hear it is doing the job well. Many thanks for sharing your experience.


Ezra Zygmuntowicz wrote:
> On Feb 6, 2008, at 10:44 AM, David Pratt wrote:
>> Hi. Both haproxy and lvs have setups that are more involved for sure. 
>> haproxy 1.3 has more balancing algorithms than 1.2. I have seen 
>> patches that provide least connection balancing for 1.2 also. lvs is 
>> what I believe to be 'the' mainstream balancer but needs to be 
>> compiled into the linux kernel - it as not as portable and simple as 
>> incorporating the fair proxy balancer as a result. Interested in Rob's 
>> experience to determine no of servers. Many thanks Grzegorz.
>> Regards,
>> David
> Hey David-
>     We're running the fair balancer on about 100 servers with good 
> success. We had some issues with the fair balancer in lower load 
> situations only sending requests to the first backend instead of doing a 
> round robin when under lower load, this was causing the single backend 
> to become overloaded. The latest version Grzegorz has just pushed to his 
> git repo works much better in all the situations we have put it under.
>     We run LVS at the edge of our clusters and have LVS balance to nginx 
> on each VM with nginx doing fair balancing directly to the mongrels and 
> it is working great. Much fewer moving parts then throwing haproxy in 
> the mix. In my benchmarks having haproxy between nginx and the mongrels 
> was s lower since there was one more level of indirection. So having 
> nginx serving static content and fair balancing to the backends is ideal 
> for us.
> Cheers-
> - Ezra Zygmuntowicz
> -- Founder & Software Architect
> -- ezra at engineyard.com
> -- EngineYard.com

More information about the nginx mailing list