Hi Matt,
I'm new to HAProxy myself, but I'm going to guess it does NOT have support for event-ports (Solaris' version of epoll or kqueues) which means it's going to use poll() and be much less performant. It's pretty much impossible to do efficient asynchronous network servers without epoll, kqueue or event-port support depending on your OS.
-J
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 4:45 PM, Matt Banks <mattbanks#gmail.com> wrote:
> All,
> In a nutshell, we REALLY like HAProxy. We've been using it on RHEL/Cent for
> a while with great success (running under VMWare/VSphere.) However, most of
> what we do is under Solaris, and we're finding that we don't get nearly as
> good of results running under Solaris 10 x86. We've compiled it using gcc 3
> and gcc 4, we've tried with USE_STATIC_PCRE=1 and without. (With proved
> better.) We've even tried tweaking some of the ndd settings (rather blindly
> after a google search gave us
> this: http://serverfault.com/questions/134578/solaris-tcp-stack-tuning) to
> no avail. We've tried it in a zone with up to 1GB of RAM, and directly on
> the server itself pointing to 127.0.0.1. Things are just slower. They
> work, but slowly.
> Frankly, we're baffled. Using a backend of two servers, there are delays of
> up to 5 seconds over a direct connection to the apache server itself. An
> offsite RHEL version of HAProxy (with a latency of around 30ms) provided us
> MUCH faster results than any Solaris install has.
> Is there something we're missing? We're about to the point of invoking
> dtrace to dig into what's going on, but I just wanted to make sure we
> weren't missing something obvious...
> Thanks,
> matt
Received on 2010/05/20 00:52
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : 2010/05/20 01:00 CEST