Rainer Jung wrote:
No, I think it's not:
1) This is not a regression, it was always implemented like that.
2) The recover feature is used in the load balancer and the first way of
avoiding errors is meant to be retries, the second way is failover. Only
then comes recovery.
3) A worker that goes into error state is something
serious/heavy-weight. Timeouts leading to error state should not be
chosen to small, so that workers go into errors just because of regular
long running requests.
4) Recovering a worker is not something lightweight, because a stuck
tomcat might mean, that every recovery times out at full length.
Remember: we are doing recovery with real requests. I think it's not a
good idea to try recovering with real requests very often. That's the
reason for only trying to recover rarely.
5) Once we might have seperate management threads in mod_proxy_ it would
make sense to probe failed workers more often.
6) We could make the interval configurable, but there is a real danger
of users thinking, that a low recovery interval, like 10 seconds would
make things better, whereas it is very likely, that it would make there
whole system kind of oscillate.
I completely agree with everything here.
Rémy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
