On Fri, Mar 07, 2014 at 01:01:04PM +0400, Dmitry Sivachenko wrote: > >> Now it behaves almost this way but without "honoring specified weights". > > > > We cannot honnor both at the same time. Most products I've tested don't > > *even* do the round robin on equal connection counts while we do. I'm just > > restating the point I made in another thread on the same subject : leastconn > > is about balancing the active number of connections, not the total number of > > connections. > > > Yes, I understand that. > > But in situation when backends are not equal, it would be nice to have an > ability to specify "weight" to balance number of *active* connections > proportional to backend's weight.
It's not a problem of option but of algorithm unfortunately. > Otherwise I am forced to maintain a pool of backends with equal hardware for > leastconn to work, but it is not always simple. I really don't understand. I really think you're using leastconn while you'd prefer to use roundrobin then. Willy
