Freeradius 3.0.7 and multiple buffered-sql servers - detail file issues

Marcin marcin at nicram.net
Tue Apr 21 08:35:40 CEST 2015


So, which is better solution for performance: keep accounting data in
details file, then read it and write to db with buffered-sql or write
accounting to database directly?
In configuration file buffered-sql we can read:
#v+
 The server can read accounting packets from the detail file much more
quickly than those packets an be written to a database.  If the database is
overloaded, then bad things can happen.

#v-



2015-04-21 0:14 GMT+02:00 Arran Cudbard-Bell <a.cudbardb at freeradius.org>:

>
> > On 20 Apr 2015, at 21:16, Rygl AleŇ° <ales at rygl.net> wrote:
> >
> > Hello Alan,
> >
> > I am able to run the following setup recommeded by you, thanks.
> >
> > accounting {
> >        ...
> >        redundant {
> >                sql
> >                detail
> >        }
> >        ...
> > }
> >
> > It looks good so far (~1000 req/s). The failover to the detail file is
> very
> > fast (tested with LOCK - sleep - UNLOCK table). Really cool.
> > I am in test environment and I am trying to tune the pool of sql
> connections
> > in order to avoid failover now.
> >
> > It would be IMHO useful if the server logs a warning that it is doing
> failover
> > to a file or another instance in the redundant section. Would it be
> possible
> > to add something like this? It's just something nice to have.
>
> redundant {
>         sql
>         group {
>                 linelog
>                 detail
>         }
> }
>
> -Arran
>
> Arran Cudbard-Bell <a.cudbardb at freeradius.org>
> FreeRADIUS development team
>
> FD31 3077 42EC 7FCD 32FE 5EE2 56CF 27F9 30A8 CAA2
>
>
> -
> List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See
> http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html
>



-- 
Pozdrawiam
Marcin / nicraM


More information about the Freeradius-Users mailing list