On 02/01/2006 03:34 PM, Plüm wrote:
>> >>>changes to the trunk tonight, so that it works at least in the >>>cumbersome way :-). >>> > > > I will cut the breaks from the patch to keep the current syntax alive. > The correct syntax should be defined and discussed later. > And of course documented, once there is a decision on that :-). Finally I found some time to continue my work on this problem. As of now I only committed the change that prevents mod_proxy_balancer from overwriting the status of workers when creating a new child process (http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=374929&view=rev). As announced I left the IMHO somewhat cryptic syntax to predefine the status of a worker in the configuration as it is. So to disable a worker at start status=disabled cannot be used, but status=d must be used instead. Even more important I did no further changes which means that automatic failover as wanted by Robby still does not work. During my search for a solution of this I got more and more unsure of what is the desired behaviour of what configuration. So I would like to start a discussion here. I see at least the following questions: 1. What is the exact meaning of a disabled worker? Should it be considered for use if find_best_worker cannot find a worker in non error mode and nofailover is set to off? Should a redirected worker that is disabled be used? 2. What about chains of redirects (worker 'a' has a redirect to worker 'b', worker 'b' has a redirect to worker 'c')? Regards Rüdiger
