Ok, that makes sense. Thanks for the help! On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 10:44 PM, Willy Tarreau <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Jay, > > On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 06:07:28PM -0800, Jay Christopherson wrote: > > I'm brand new to haproxy, having just implemented it this week. So far, > > it's been great. > > > > We are using it in front of a series of Apache web servers using mod_php. > > I've seen some notes around that indicate you can (or should) disable > > KeepAlive on your Apache servers and use option http-server-close to do > > client side keepalive using HAproxy, which seems like a good idea in our > > case. > > > > What I'm wondering is, what is the case for using http-server-close in a > > frontend vs. backend, or both? I have some other front and backends > that I > > specifically don't want keepalive, so I don't want to set it in defaults. > > Having http-server-close in frontend or backend doesn't change anything for > the traffic that passes through both frontend and backend. > > However, the various *close options are cumulative. They can be seen as > some unsupported capabilities, in that the lowest quality wins. For example > if you have http-server-close in the frontend and forceclose in the > backend, > the later wins. > > From what you're describing, I think that you want to put it everywhere (or > in a defaults section), and manually adjust some frontends or some backends > to add a forceclose which will take precedence. It will be by far the > easiest > solution. > > Regards, > Willy > >
