Single-node performance

The hosts/LB/end-points are run as docker pods inside a single server/node. The topology is as follows :

LB Single Test

The following command can be used to configure lb for the given topology:

# loxicmd create lb --tcp=2020:5001 --endpoints=,,

The testing is done with full stateful connection tracking enabled (non dsr mode). To create the above topology for testing loxilb, users can follow this guide. A go webserver with an empty response is used for benchmark purposes. The code is as following :

package main

import (

func main() {
        http.HandleFunc("/", func(w http.ResponseWriter, r *http.Request) {

        if err := http.ListenAndServe(":5001", nil); err != nil {
                log.Fatal("ListenAndServe: ", err)

The above code runs in each of the load-balancer end-points as following :

go run ./webserver.go

wrk based HTTP benchmarking is one of the tools used in this test. This tool is run with the following parameters:

root@loxilb:/home/loxilb # wrk -t8 -c400 -d30s
  • where t: No. of threads, c: No. of connections. d: Duration of test

We also run other popular performance testing tools like netperf, iperf along with wrk for the above topology. A quick explanation of terminologies used :

RPS - requests per seconds. Given a fixed number of connections, this denotes how many requests/message per second can be supported
CPS - connections per second. This denotes how many new TCP connection setup/teardowns can be supported per second and hence one of the most important indicators of load-balancer performance
CRR - connect/request/response. This is same as CPS but netperf tool uses this term to refer to CPS as part of its test scenario
RR - request/response. This is another netperf test option. We used it to measure min and avg latency

The results are as follows :

Case 1. System Configuration - Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-4770HQ CPU @ 2.20GHz , 3-Core, 6GB RAM, Kernel 5.15.0-52-generic

Tool loopback loxilb ipvs
wrk(RPS) 38040 44833 40012
wrk(CPS) n/a 7020 6048
netperf(CRR) n/a 11674 9901
netperf(RR min) 12.31 us 15.2us 19.75us
netperf(RR avg) 61.27 us 78.1us 131us
iperf 43.5Gbps 41.2Gbps 34.4Gbps

Case 2. System Configuration - Intel(R) Xeon(R) Silver 4210R CPU @ 2.40GHz, 40-core, 124GB RAM, Kernel 5.15.0-52-generic

Tool loopback loxilb ipvs haproxy
wrk(RPS) 406953 421746 388021 217004
wrk(CPS) n/a 45064 24400 22000
netperf(CRR) n/a 375k 174k 21k
netperf(RR min) n/a 12 us 15us 27us
netperf(RR avg) n/a 15.78 us 18.25us 35.76us
iperf 456Gbps 402Gbps 374Gbps 91Gbps

Conclusion/Notes -

  • loxilb provides enhanced performance across the spectrum of tests. There is a noticeable gain in CPS
  • loxilb's CPS is limited only by the fact that this is a single node scenario with shared resources
  • "loopback" here refers to client and server running in the same host/pod. This is supposed to be the best case scenario but since there is only a single end-point for lo compared to 3 for LB testing , hence the RPS measurements are on the lower side.
  • iperf is run with 100 threads ( iperf X.X.X.X -P 100 )
  • haproxy version used - 2.0.29
  • netperf test scripts can be found here

Watch the video