[Pdns-users] pdns-recursor performance
Brad.Dameron at clearwire.com
Tue Aug 5 08:56:46 UTC 2008
Thanks for the link. We also looked at NSD which is another good one. unbound appears to be threaded? That would offer the performance gains. Especially on the quad-core CPU's we use. However my current configuration launches multiple pdns instances in the forked mode each on a seperate IP using Foundry ServerIrons to load balance between IP's and machines. Seems to scale really well. I also saw another way of scaling based on a dnscache configuration where you have pdns instances point to other pdns instances as their root name servers. This caches asking caches which then ask the real root servers if none of them know. Appears to be a good scalable solution as well.
What is echo I see listed on there?
From: pdns-users-bounces at mailman.powerdns.com on behalf of Leen Besselink
Sent: Tue 8/5/2008 1:44 AM
To: pdns-users at mailman.powerdns.com
Subject: Re: [Pdns-users] pdns-recursor performance
On Tue, Aug 05, 2008 at 10:29:14AM +0200, Leen Besselink wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 05, 2008 at 12:30:25AM -0700, Brad Dameron wrote:
> > And you will see your response times drop from 1-2 seconds to milliseconds. I did a lot of testing of this and pdns-recursor is definitely the best out there.
> > Brad
> Hi Brad,
> Did you also test Unbound ( www.unbound.net ) ?
> They say they are faster, they are a fairly new player in this field (version 1.0.0 released May 20, 2008).
> I can't find the graph. The graph I've seen shows PowerDNS and bind pretty
> close together. Which I found a bit strange.
I did find the graphs:
> Even if they are faster, atleast they are keeping the title in the Netherlands
> (PowerDNS and NLNetlabs are both dutch organisations). :-)
> I've not used/tested it.
Pdns-users mailing list
Pdns-users at mailman.powerdns.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Pdns-users