I think you need to make a distinction between the timeout *attribute*
on a BalancerMember and the one on a balancer itself. At least the code
does the distinction (2.2.4).
a) timeout for a Balancermember (aka worker): timeout waiting for a read
or write on an existing backend connection to complete.
b) timeout for a balancer: if it can't get a connection from the pool,
it will try again in intervals of timeout*1000/100 milliseconds until
timeout seconds have expired (i.e. 100 times) or it managed to get a
connection,
I think the documentation does not correctly document the code for the
a) part!
Regards,
Rainer
Jess Holle wrote:
Okay, I'm still wondering about the future behavior based on the "Re:
ProxyTimeout does not work as documented" thread (which is why I'm
bothering the dev mailing list, since the thread is from there), but
after some testing the current (2.2.4) behavior is clearly that:
1. If no timeout is specified on proxy workers:
* They will wait indefinitely for a free connection to the
back end.
* They will wait for ProxyTimeout or 300 seconds for a
response from the back end servers.
2. If a timeout is specified on proxy workers:
* They will use this timeout as the time to wait for a free
connection.
* They will use this timeout as the time to wait for a
response from the back end servers.
Everything but the last bullet item of (2) is crystal clear from the
documentation. That last bullet was clear as mud to me from the docs,
though.
--
Jess Holle
