Varnish and Perlbal

André Cruz andre.cruz at
Mon Jul 2 15:40:22 CEST 2007

Ok, I'll try it both ways to test.

And regarding my other question... Should Perlbal handle the request  
first, and pass it to some varnish process or should varnish process  
the request first and send only the misses to PerlBal+Apache?

Perlbal is probably better at load-balancing since it is it's core  
function, no?

Thanks for your help,

On 2007/07/02, at 12:43, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:

> André Cruz <andre.cruz at> writes:
>> Right now I have 2 Perlbals balancing requests to 4 apache backends.
>> I'm very happy with Perlbal's load balancing capabilities so I'm
>> looking for the best way to integrate varnish with this Perlbal +
>> Apache configuration. Which should come first in the flow; Perbal or
>> Varnish?
> Probably the easiest way to integrate Varnish, at least to begin with,
> is to run it on the same servers as Apache.  This way, cache misses  
> are
> processed without network overhead, and you can easily run Varnish on
> just one server in each pair to compare performance.
> Running Varnish on the Perlbal servers will halve the load on each
> Apache server, but increase the response time for cache misses.
> -- 
> Dag-Erling Smørgrav
> Senior Software Developer
> Linpro AS -

More information about the varnish-misc mailing list