Hi Willy, On Mon, Dec 01, 2014 at 09:18:05AM +0900, Simon Horman wrote: > On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 05:11:27PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 08:22:05AM +0100, Willy Tarreau wrote: > > > Hi Simon, > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 03:55:53PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote: > > > > disable starts a server in the disabled state, however setting the > > > > health > > > > of an agent implies that the agent is disabled as well as the server. > > > > > > > > This is a problem because the state of the agent is not restored if > > > > the state of the server is subsequently updated leading to an > > > > unexpected state. > > > > > > > > For example, if a server is started disabled and then the server > > > > state is set to ready then without this change show stat indicates > > > > that the server is "DOWN (agent)" when it is expected that the server > > > > would be UP if its (non-agent) health check passes. > > > > > > Interesting case. I believe I caused it myself while trying to address > > > a different case : health checks are disabled, only agent checks are > > > enabled, and the server is disabled in the configuration. Could you > > > please check that this use case still works properly with your patch ? > > > I'd rather avoid to see the server continue to show up! > > > > Thanks, will do. > > > > I was aware you had done some work in this area but I wasn't entirely > > sure what case you were trying to fix. Thanks for filling in that gap > > in my knowledge. > > Hi Willy, > > I have tested the following scenario which I hope matches the one that you > describe: > > 1. Start haproxy with server disabled in config > 2. Disable health checks using: > echo "disable health VIP_Name/RIP_Name" | socat .. > 2. Enable server using: > echo "set server VIP_Name/RIP_Name state ready" | socat ... > > > The results are as follows: > > 1. With this patch applied and agent-check enabled > > Server status is reported as "" > > 2. With this patch applied and agent-check not configured in config > > Server status is reported as "" > > 3. Without this patch applied and agent-check enabled > > Server status is reported as "DOWN (agent)" > > 4. With this patch applied and agent-check not configured in config > > Server status is reported as "" > > > My working assumption is that unless the agent-check explicitly > marks a backend as down then the backend should not be considered > down due to the agent-check. This includes this scenario when the > agent-check is not responding. This seems to be reflected in > the implementation other than the area of HTTP statistics. > > As both 1) and 2) are consistent with 4) it seems to me that this > patch is correct in the context of the scenario you describe (assuming > my test is correct).
This seems to have slipped through the cracks. I'm wondering if we could revisit it and the other patch in this series.
