How do you deal with the worker connection to the multiple beanstalk 
instances?

On Tuesday, 8 January 2013 01:24:06 UTC-5, chadkouse wrote:
>
> 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].
> 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.
>  
>
>  -- 
> 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]<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 unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/beanstalk-talk?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


Reply via email to