Re: HAProxy vs Ldirectord vs Relayd(Hoststated)

Brian,

My personal opinion is:

ldirectord uses LVS as the backend which is blindingly fast and layer 4 only. The health checking part is not parallel so for large numbers of real servers can become slow. I've been trying to get someone to re-code the check as a child process without any luck so far.

On modern CPUs performance is less of an issue than it used to be and HaProxy scales very, very well.

2009/5/14 Brian Kruger <bek41#cox.net>
>
> Hi,
>
> I've been looking for a nice load balancing solution.  I've taken a look at openbsd's relayd which looks decent coupled with carp..
>
> relayd looks like you can do some custom scripting for it do to various checks much like HAProxy, but I haven't seen really anyone put it through paces for testing. (perhaps I'll try to do this one day in the near future.)  Mostly w/ layer 7 stuff is where I'm curious how it'll perform.
>
> Other than some of the extensive web config w/ layer 7 and such for HAProxy, are there any significant performance gains vs using ldirectord?  I've been searching around, but I haven't seen very much about it at all.
>
> Any information would be appreciated.
> Thanks!
> -Brian
>
>
>
>
>

--
Regards,

Malcolm Turnbull.

Loadbalancer.org Ltd.
Phone: +44 (0)870 443 8779
http://www.loadbalancer.org/