1 Reply Latest reply on Jul 16, 2014 10:29 PM by malware-alerts

    Detailed HTTP performance not reflecting user experience?

    malware-alerts

      Running 2 sites with 2 MWG 7.3.2.10 in cluster (1 cluster per site).

       

      All MWG are running in transparent router mode (yes,I know not ideal)

       

      When looking at the "Detailed HTTP Performance" graphs from the dashboard on site #1, the "Total transaction"  time is somewhere around 1000ms on average, pretty stable with a few peaks.

       

      When looking at the "Detailed HTTP Performance" graphs from the dashboard on site #2, the "Total transaction"  time is litterally all over the place, anywhere from 100ms to 125,000ms (thats right, 125 seconds!).

       

      Yet, users on both sites are having pretty much the same experience as far as web browsing and file download which is very decent. (no one is complaining about slow performance or anything around that)

       

      What gives? (Attached are graphs from the last 3 hours from both sites)

       

      Message was edited by: malware-alerts on 7/16/14 6:55:02 PM CDT
        • 1. Re: Detailed HTTP performance not reflecting user experience?
          malware-alerts

          I believe I have answered my own question.

           

          I have 4 MEG appliances using the MWG from SITE2 as their proxy for their updates. 

           

          When I configure the 4 MEG appliances to use SITE1 MWG as their proxy, SITE2's stats become very stable and SITE1's stats become crazy like the graph above...

           

          Now I understand passing the MEG updates through a proxy is not ideal, but why on earth would they be throwing off the performance stats like that? (Again, user experience is the same in both sites, notwithstanding if the MEG appliances fetch their updates through the site or not.