HUP handling: a thought
cparker at starnetusa.net
Mon May 7 17:18:15 CEST 2007
On May 6, 2007, at 12:34 PM, Nicolas Baradakis wrote:
>> But if all you're doing is adding one realm... why the heck do you
>> want to reload the other 3000 realms to add just one? That doesn't
>> make sense. It's an O(N^2) solution to a problem that should be O
> I agree. But large sites should have multiple servers, therefore
> perhaps they could address the issue differently.
Being a "large site", I can speak to this. :) We stagger HUPs to
changes today. It *still* causes a noticeable impact on connection
are tracked by our largest customers. We had to roll back from 'on-
changes to scheduling periodic HUPs to lessen the impact on our
The impact is that a larger percentage of connection attempts timeout/
fail due to
the hit the server takes to reload the configs, even when they are
across multiple servers.
That's my underlying desire to be able to change the server details
for realm "foo"
without taking a hit on the 3000 other realms, which aren't changing.
StarNet - US LEC, now a PAETEC Company
(888)212-0099 Fax (847)963-1302
Wholesale Internet and VoIP Services http://www.megapop.net
NOTICE: Message is sent IN CONFIDENCE to addressees. It may contain
information that is privileged, proprietary or confidential.
More information about the Freeradius-Devel