On 01.02.2009 22:51, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Feb 1, 2009, at 3:08 AM, Mladen Turk wrote:
Think Jim introduced the lbset balancer property, so he would probably
know best how this is supposed to work.
IIUC lbset should allow to create the group of balancer members,
and that's great. However IMO the logic inside balancer providers
in not valid. The balancing should be done for a particular
set, however IMO it's done always from 0...current set
Here is the code
if (worker->s->lbset > cur_lbset)
continue;
...
cur_lbset++
IMO it should be
if (worker->s->lbset != cur_lbset)
continue;
...
cur_lbset++
Yes... the current logic assumes that the ordering of the
configed lbsets is sequential, which is not a valid assumption.
fixed. Thanks!
Both ways would make sense. I remember when Jim added it in 2006, which
was shortly after mod_jk added the distance attribute. So I think the
original intention might have actually been to express preferences and
not really separate independent groups (like domains in mod_jk).
Regards,
Rainer
