Sure, from our ops team to you:

listen beanstalk-production 100.100.100.100:11300
mode tcp
option abortonclose
option log-separate-errors
maxconn 4415
option httpchk
balance roundrobin
timeout client 120s
timeout connect 120s
timeout server 120s
server bns4.shared.day1 172.0.0.4:11300 check port 9200 inter 10s fall 2 rise 5
server bns5.shared.day1 172.0.0.5:11300 check port 9200 inter 10s fall 2 rise 5
server bns6.shared.day1 172.0.0.6:11300 check port 9200 inter 10s fall 2 rise 5

for port 9200, we have a script running on each host under xinetd, that gives 
an HTTP 200 if the host is healthy, and a 304 if not. 

-- chad


On Monday, January 7, 2013 at 9:00 PM, Drew Broadley wrote:

> Chad, are you able to provide your haproxy configuration for beanstalkd in 
> high availability mode ?
> 
> On Thursday, 18 October 2012 08:50:28 UTC+13, chadkouse wrote:
> > I'm not sure about like 90% of what you said but we present our beanstalkd 
> > pool to our application as a single point of entry maintained by a set of 
> > haproxy's. works pretty well and is simple enough.  
> > 
> > -- 
> > Chad Kouse
> > 
> > 
> > On Wednesday, October 17, 2012 at 12:43 PM, B. Estrade wrote:
> > 
> > > I am working on a project that needs a job queue, and beanstalkd is 
> > > looking very attractive. The thing is that we really want to make the 
> > > application very highly available, and the fact that federation of 
> > > beanstalkd is left to the client (like memcached) has lead me to consider 
> > > the following approach.  I'd like to create a resource manager that 
> > > maintains a pool of daemons, but presents to the client application the 
> > > view as a single and highly available process that is managing these 
> > > requests.
> > > 
> > > I would like to basically create a resource manager that provides 
> > > failover and redundancy via a pool of distributed beanstalkd instances.  
> > > The application, however, will view things logically as a single logical 
> > > instance of the queue.  It looks like that the way to go would be to 
> > > manage the pool of beanstalkd instances using Paxos.
> > > 
> > > My primary question after reading the documentation is, how would one use 
> > > the existing features (as atomic primitives, so to speak) of beanstalkd 
> > > to create a resource manager that provides the isolation guarantees and 
> > > atomic changes to the state of a queue?  As far as I can tell, this would 
> > > be possible if a) there was a way to provide a temporary change to the 
> > > queue (e.g., a job or set of jobs) and b) a way to make the temporary 
> > > changes visible in an atomic way ( I suppose a daemon would also need to 
> > > know if it's OK to make the commit, too).  I don't think that these needs 
> > > are unique the to distributed commit protocol since this would be 
> > > required by each daemon individually to facilitate the protocol itself.  
> > > Leader elect, I think, can be handled outside of the daemon.
> > > 
> > > I would like to provide strong consistency across all beanstalkd 
> > > instances in the pool; I am not interested, really, in simply 
> > > master/slave replication (which I suppose one could facilitate via the 
> > > bin log of a master). I am interested in seeing if it is possible to 
> > > implement a Paxos like protocol among all daemons in the pool using 
> > > beanstalkd's current capabilities.  Weak or eventual consistency is also 
> > > an option, but I'd like to see how possible the ideal is at the onset. 
> > > 
> > > Thanks!
> > > Brett 
> > > 
> > > -- 
> > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> > > "beanstalk-talk" group.
> > > To view this discussion on the web visit 
> > > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/beanstalk-talk/-/wnNdSeBC_GkJ.
> > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected] 
> > > (javascript:).
> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> > > [email protected] (javascript:).
> > > For more options, visit this group at 
> > > http://groups.google.com/group/beanstalk-talk?hl=en.
> > 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "beanstalk-talk" group.
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/beanstalk-talk/-/w25lHXeg7LcJ.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected] 
> (mailto:[email protected]).
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> [email protected] 
> (mailto:[email protected]).
> For more options, visit this group at 
> http://groups.google.com/group/beanstalk-talk?hl=en.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"beanstalk-talk" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/beanstalk-talk?hl=en.

Reply via email to