using parallel varnishes

Per Buer perbu at
Fri Jun 18 10:22:01 CEST 2010

On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 7:02 AM, Don Faulkner <dfaulkner at> wrote:
> I like the setup. But for some reason I think it needs to be:
> web server -> load balancer -> cache -> load balancer -> ssl endpoint

One thing to consider; almost any server that is still within warranty
can deliver at least 1Gbps of traffic through Varnish, on new hardware
reaching 10Gbps shouldn't be that big a deal (is there someone out
there with 10Gbps hardware that would like to help us test? :-). So,
you should ask yourself - do you really need a load balancer in front
of Varnish? Having more Varnish server than you need will decrease
your hit rate (unless you're hashing on the URL) and will increase
your response time. It will also add to the complexity of the setup.
Relying on a simple cluster of just two servere where just the IP
address moves in case of failure will in a lot of scenarios lead to
better performance and better uptime.

Per Buer,  Varnish Software
Phone: +47 21 98 92 61 / Mobile: +47 958 39 117 / skype: per.buer

More information about the varnish-misc mailing list