[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
TCP time_wait and port exhaustion for servers
- Subject: TCP time_wait and port exhaustion for servers
- From: bill at herrin.us (William Herrin)
- Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2012 13:58:58 -0500
- In-reply-to: <CALFTrnN6rxw25FjP-06FDt6Ug4FNLXi_=A3SM8+D4JkgkSpwmA@mail.gmail.com>
- References: <CALFTrnNj2e9HUjukAUi-jtTsuGTugxe2-iEpm8v+wk8JKnuBQA@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.GSO.2.01.1212051736520.15072@mono> <CALFTrnN6rxw25FjP-06FDt6Ug4FNLXi_=A3SM8+D4JkgkSpwmA@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 12:09 PM, Ray Soucy <rps at maine.edu> wrote:
> Like most web traffic, the majority of these connections open and
> close in under a second. When we get to a point that there is enough
> traffic from users behind the proxy to be generating over 500 new
> outgoing connections per second, sustained, we start having users
> experience an error where there are no local ports available to Squid
> to use since they're all tied up in a TIME_WAIT state.
>
> Here is an example of netstat totals on a box we're seeing the behavior on:
>
> 481947 TIME_WAIT
Stupid question but how does 500 x 60 = 481947? To have that many
connections in TIME_WAIT on a 60 second timer, you'd need more like
8000 connections per second, wouldn't you?
Regards,
Bill Herrin
--
William D. Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com bill at herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004