Ruediger Pluem wrote: > > > > On 07/11/2006 10:41 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > I've folded in my impl of hot-standby for proxy workers... > > check out trunk. I'm sure there is tuning to be done, but > > it's a functional impl that minimizes the code touched. > > Just to be sure that I got the correct understanding of the hot-standby > worker: > > The hot-standby worker is the last resort if the site would be otherwise dead. > The hot-standby worker can be used e.g. to display a maintenance page or a > simpler > version of the site or if you can affort the full site from an environment > that > only consumes power during a healthy state of the site. > > This would be different from a disabled worker which would be elected if the > session > route matches, but which would not be elected by a balancer algorithm. This > is the > way it works in mod_jk, but currently does not work in mod_proxy_balancer. > Once I > get some spare cycles I would like to make this work and make the small > changes needed > for this. > With this feature you can prefer "local" workers, but you can keep session > stickyness > for requests that do not origin from this "local" worker. >
This is actually coming :) My thoughts are how to make this better; overloading the concept of "disabled" workers to mean multiple things depending on different situations seems glocky to me. Stopped should mean stopped, disabled should mean disabled. I do like the distance attribute and am looking at the best way to impl something similar while still keeping things as abstracted out as possible. Almost a sort of "balancer set" would be nice, where, for example, you define a balancer set with some members as set #1, and they would "always" be chosen (and looked at for LB) and set #2 (and later) would only be considered if no one in set #1 is available. -- =========================================================================== Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/ "If you can dodge a wrench, you can dodge a ball."
