best performance alternative using multiple virtual server to bound IP/port
philemon.jaomalaza at gmail.com
Mon Jun 25 17:21:29 CEST 2018
Thank for your Answer Alan, that's very clear.
I will use this option :
define multiple virtual servers with one global "listen" section
> IP/port for all virtual server
De : Freeradius-Users [mailto:freeradius-users-bounces+philemon.jaomalaza=gmail.com at lists.freeradius.org] De la part de Alan DeKok
Envoyé : lundi 25 juin 2018 17:26
À : FreeRadius users mailing list <freeradius-users at lists.freeradius.org>
Objet : Re: best performance alternative using multiple virtual server to bound IP/port
On Jun 25, 2018, at 4:35 AM, Philemon Jaomalaza <philemon.jaomalaza at gmail.com> wrote:
> what the best practice and give best performance and memory usage
The server uses as much memory as it needs. You can't really optimize memory usage as with a database.
Performance is a little more complex. 99% of performance issues are outside of the servers control. e.g. databases, certificate validation, etc.
make sure all *other* systems are optimized, and FreeRADIUS will be fine. The bottleneck is rarely FreeRADIUS.
> if I want
> to have a separate service per client :
> - define multiple virtual servers with one global "listen" section
> IP/port for all virtual server.
That's likely the simplest to understand. It also means you can have different policies for each virtual server, if you need them.
> - define multiple virtual servers and each server has its listen
> section IP/port different
I wouldn't do that.
> - define single virtual servers and use if ....elsif....else to select
> the proper sql module.
That's simple (one virtual server), but the virtual server is more complex with if / then / else. It works, but I wouldn't do it myself.
List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html
More information about the Freeradius-Users