Yeah, that sounds about right. I'd say that whatever changes need (or should be) made are fine
> On Dec 21, 2023, at 1:32 PM, Rainer Jung <rainer.j...@kippdata.de> wrote: > > I guess it could be like this: when Mladen originally implemented the by > requests load balancing method in mod_jk he used the count and subtract > method for the counters. He then ported this to mod_proxy_balancer and I > think it is still, how by requests counting woorks there. > > There are pros and cons, e.g. in case a worker goes down for some time. A bit > later we switched in mod_jk to a count and divide, where division by 2 was > done roughly every 60 seconds (configurable). > > I think the idea of the age method was roughly, that you could implement a > balanvcer method, that registers a mod_watchdog task, that regularly ages the > balancing counters. Aging because you want to give the past a smaller > influence on the balancing decision than the more recent activity. > > I hope that's understandable and maybe Jim remembers something similar to > that. > > Best regards, > > Rainer > > Am 21.12.23 um 08:23 schrieb jean-frederic clere: >> On 12/20/23 21:22, Jim Jagielski wrote: >>> I'll have to go back through my notes... I do recall adding fields that >>> although >>> were not being used at the time, were _going to be used_ as some point, and >>> I didn't want to have to worry about ABI compatibility. >> Cool I will wait before implementing something that breaks your design ;-) >>> >>>> On Dec 14, 2023, at 8:27 AM, jean-frederic clere <jfcl...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> Any examples or docs about: >>>> apr_status_t (*age)(proxy_balancer *balancer, server_rec *s); >>>> >>>> In struct proxy_balancer_method? >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Cheers >>>> >>>> Jean-Frederic
