[Spread-users] spread slow to notice failures

[Ryan Caudy]

To quote an earlier email sent by Yair:
"To me, the segment definition in your example below seems incorrect.
You should not include 127.0.0.1 in a spread configuration file unless
the configuration file includes exactly one segment with exactly one
machine."

Thus, the first thing I would try is following that advice.

--Ryan

Generic Player wrote:
> I am testing out spread right now to do load balancing between 2 
> webservers, using wackamole.  When I first start spread, they take 
> about 10 seconds to find each other, and when I turn off one of the 
> machines, it takes 30 seconds for the other to notice and respond.
> 
> Wackamole is fine, as soon as I see the membership event from spread, 
> wackamole moves the IPs, its just for some reason spread takes a long 
> time to notice when the other machine goes down.  I tried lowering the 
> values in membership.c, but it had no effect.  The only other thing 
> I've seen is people saying can cause slowness like this is because of 
> broadcast traffic not working, but broadcast traffic works fine from 
> what I can tell.
> 
> r.c and s.c don't compile, so I can't really test with those.  But if I 
> ping 10.0.0.255 both machines respond.  The machines are directly 
> connected to each other via crossover cable, 1000baseTX full-duplex.  
> Network connectivity is fine, no errors, good throughput.
> 
> Here's a copy of the config, its the same on both machines.
> 
> Spread_Segment 127.0.0.255:4803 {
> 	localhost	127.0.0.1
> }
> 
> Spread_Segment 10.0.0.255 {
> 	one	10.0.0.1
> 	two	10.0.0.2
> }
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Spread-users mailing list
> Spread-users at lists.spread.org
> http://lists.spread.org/mailman/listinfo/spread-users
>