Running multiple perlbal instances
russ at last.fm
Tue Jan 29 23:44:12 UTC 2008
[CCd to the list because I think it would be interesting for other people]
Our LVS boxes are separate pristine machines which don't do anything
other than LVS (they balance quite a lot of other stuff), then we have 3
machines dedicated to perlbal.
For various reasons it's inadvisable to run target servers on the same
box as LVS - since LVS is a thin layer at kernel level you end up with
lots of issues - it is well worth having separate machines if you're
Kevin Olson wrote:
> I’m curious, what kind of LVS set up do you have? Is each perlbal
> instance on a separate box, or are you doing some kind of additional
> virtualization within the boxes running perlbal.
> On 1/29/08 3:19 PM, "Russ Garrett" <russ at last.fm> wrote:
> Kevin Olson wrote:
> > Does anyone have some advice on running multiple perlbal
> instances on one
> > multi-cpu box? We're getting to the point where one perlbal
> instance is
> > handling 30,000-45,000 connections/min and load is hitting 1.00.
> > An easy solution would seem to be to have different perlbal instances
> > handling different vips, but that introduces extra config files
> and what
> > not. It'd be nice to simply round-robin load balance between the two
> > instances, without adding another full blown load balancer to the
> We currently have 10 perlbal instances running, which are
> by one machine (actually a heartbeat pair) running LVS. Our config is
> managed centrally with a couple of subsitution variables and a
> make script.
> If you assign one perlbal instance per vip, it might work well to
> with, but if one of your vips gains enough traffic to swamp one
> instance, you're still going to need a higher level of load-balancing.
> Russ Garrett
> Last.fm Ltd.
> russ at last.fm
More information about the perlbal