Hey Alex,
It’s exiting to hear this new features coming about, and that the VR
performance will be improved as a result of pure routing.
We have a pain point right now where our VR is at 75% CPU when handling 200Mbps
Internet Traffic. Probably because we have 50 Autoscale Groups within that 1
Hi Alex and Wei Zhou,
Thanks for the input, so it seems this new feature is more beneficial for those
who are currently using Shared Networks.
We have 50 AutoscaleGroups in a single VR because our company mainly
distributes/broadcasts stock prices from multiple exchanges to public users, so
lo
We update the VR offering to be 4 Core, 4GB. Its a single router setup atm but
we’re going to make it redundant soon.
Also, we have a 3rd case which i forgot to mention.
Internet/Leased Line -> ASG LB (API GW) -> Private Gateway to another VPC
within same zone -> ASG LB (Microservice 3) -> DB
Hey Alex
Noted on this, will look into it.
Whats the most expensive task in the VR? Load Balancing? Routing? NAT? ACL?
Regards,
Bryan
On 30 Aug 2024 at 7:27 PM +0800, Alex Mattioli ,
wrote:
> Hi Bryan,
>
> Indeed, your use case is extreme, I'd highly recommend using more networks
> with less a
I can't say for sure, but based on my experience with the VR and other
networking devices I'd say it is (in order):
- NAT, (sNAT, dNAT, 1:1 NAT), by a fair margin
- Load Balancing
- Firewall/ACL
- Routing
- DHCP, DNS, UserData (those are very low cost)
VPN is also demanding, but is not used near
