Marc Breslow wrote:
> Sorry, I'm still a relative novice when it comes to linux sysadmin
> stuff. (If anyone knows any good people in NY looking for a network
> engineering/sysadmin job, have them contact me).
I just met up online with an old friend in Niagra who's looking. I forwarded your message to him.
>
> From top it looks like it's almost all system - although I'm not sure
> how to get that breakdown at the process level.
>
> top - 16:58:29 up 17 days, 8:09, 1 user, load average: 1.03, 1.24, 1.31
> Tasks: 85 total, 2 running, 83 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie
> Cpu0 : 1.3% us, 36.2% sy, 0.0% ni, 60.8% id, 0.0% wa, 1.7% hi, 0.0% si
> Cpu1 : 2.7% us, 60.5% sy, 0.0% ni, 36.9% id, 0.0% wa, 0.0% hi, 0.0% si
> Mem: 2074716k total, 1307116k used, 767600k free, 122528k buffers
> Swap: 8385912k total, 0k used, 8385912k free, 617172k cached
>
> PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
> 18072 root 25 0 141m 138m 408 S 100 6.8 1269:44 haproxy
>
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but that looks like a healthy system to me. Yes, HAProxy is pegged at 100% cpu, but the two processors are idling at on the average 50%. You're only running 50% full load right now.
You could try to optimize your config file so that haproxy does less work with every incoming request, that'll save on the system call side.
-Dan Received on 2008/02/14 05:14
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : 2008/02/14 05:15 CET