Forum Discussion

Matt_Drake_5894's avatar
Matt_Drake_5894
Icon for Nimbostratus rankNimbostratus
Jun 01, 2006

off topic: monitor question.. what uses less resources on the bigip

Hi,

 

 

I was talking with my boss today about our bigip config and the result is this simple question..

 

What monitor takes up less resources on the bigip box, the http monitor or the tcp moonitor? Here is an example of the monitors in question..

 

 

monitor test_monitor {

 

defaults from http

 

send "GET /xxxx/heartbeat"

 

}

 

monitor heartbeat {

 

defaults from tcp

 

interval 10

 

recv "200 OK"

 

send "GET /xxxx/heartbeat HTTP/1.0\r\n"

 

}

 

 

The 'heartbeat' page referenced in the GETs only returns a simple page with OK in it if that makes any difference.

 

 

Thanks.

 

Matt

 

P.S. Many thanks to the first f5 dev that can fix CR64768.

 

  • Colin,

     

     

    Thanks for the response.. I saw another post about an LTM forum and I certainly would like to see one. I am surprised that F5 does not have one setup already. Just look at the official Cisco forums to see what I think is a good example of a successful corp backed forum. Is there an LTM mail list that I don't know about?

     

     

    Matt
  • From what I have read between the lines, I feel that F5 is afraid of loosing out on support contracts if the forum does as well as this one. The reason I feel this way is because several people have asked without a really good response from F5 why it can't be done.

     

     

    With the state of F5 support at the moment, you would think they would work hard to get this LTM forum going as soon as possible. Not that F5 support is bad, they have a lot of really great staff members. However, these guys are overloaded with support tickets. If I remember correctly F5 as a whole has almost doubled sales from last year. It takes days to get a return call on the most critical issues. I couldn't imagine how long it would take for a basic info request. I have even made the recommendation that F5 require support contracts to access the proposed LTM forum. That would save their sales income and make all of us happy.

     

     

    They would win in that scenario because most of the questions would be answered by peers rather than F5 phone support. There is no telling how much money they could possibly save. Think about that for minute... I apologize for the long winded message but as you can tell I am a little frustrated with F5 support. It is very expensive with very little return. Ask f5 was great five years ago now its old and the search engine is way under par.

     

     

    I love the products and the company. They have a great product which means they have great people from top to bottom. I guess thats why its so frustrating that they can't see the benefit of a LTM forum and the return it could provide.

     

     

     

    Have a great weekend!
  • It is good to hear that the LTM requests have not fallen on deaf ears. However, setting up the whole LTM forum/site "infrastructure" could take years for some companies to complete. I would be happy with just a LTM mail list to start.

     

     

    There are some things that a forum/mail list can provide that support can not(or is not willing to). Just recently, I asked support for a sample bigip.conf file that shows off some of the features of the F5. They were not able to provide this and that kind of a request would probably be better served on a forum.

     

     

    I guess only time will tell what happens with this.

     

     

    Matt