Persistance and LVS

Malcolm Turnbull malcolm at loadbalancer.org
Tue Apr 27 11:41:04 BST 2004


pb wrote:


> Our webmail is set on the webmail real servers to be
> 60 min before it gives up the session, but setting LVS
> to 15 min was just so they can login to webmail, and I
> never saw any trouble with this setup. I did not
> believe the LVS persistance needed to match the
> webmail persistance, due to the unlike strategies of
> persistance behind each. Yes/no???
> 

If you can't login without persistence on the loadbalancer then your web 
mail app does NOT have persistent sessions (i.e. backend sharred database.)

>    -----------------------------------------
> Would changing 15 to 60min Persistance on the LVS take
> up a lot of memory and processing (CPU/load) overhead?
> We're running 1gb of memory and dual pentium III.
>    -----------------------------------------
> 

I would think it would be fine, 1 GB should handle almost 8 million 
connections in the timeout period i.e. 60 mins (or 2mins with no 
persistence) Some one clever might correct me on that but I think its true.


-- 
Regards,

Malcolm Turnbull

Loadbalancer.org Limited
07715 770523
http://www.loadbalancer.org/


More information about the lvs-users mailing list