RE: Load Balancing

[AgentM]

I don't quite understand why you don't use LWP::Simple. In order to best simulate a real web browser, you should be downloading all of the web page anyway, so complicating your code with Net::Telnet just isn't worth it- unless you have a counter argument, I just don't see the point...

AgentM Systems nor Nasca Enterprises nor Bone::Easy nor Macperl is responsible for the comments made by AgentM. Remember, you can build any logical system with NOR.

[meonkeys]

How would you find out that one of your load-balanced boxes' httpd was working more slowly than the others? I'm open to suggestions.

[AgentM]

Use available benchmarking software like Big Brother to optimize your system. Your current testing scheme may become invalid if you uncover network anomalies (or are you looking for network anomalies?). Have a simple script pound your webserver locally (assuming that it's a dedicated webserver) or over a connection that is otherwise dead of traffic. Every machine most likely has an IP (metaserver setup, right?), so use that in your call to LWP::Simple. Fork a multitude of fake browsers and see how many concurrent hits the server can take. Do this with all the machines and compare results. Good luck.

I just thought of an easier way. I believe most webservers have some benchmarking capabilites. In that case, throw a benchmark patch onto the metaserver to time how much each serve is taking in response to the same web page being retrieved repeatedly. You'll be easily able to pick out the slow poke!


AgentM Systems nor Nasca Enterprises nor Bone::Easy nor Macperl is responsible for the comments made by AgentM. Remember, you can build any logical system with NOR.