I didn't say that if one can hit it, they all can. However, if you want to use that logic, then I'd counter with.. if it's not currently the active instance, it doesn't matter if it can or not. Thus, why do the health check?
The only time it'd matter if the inactive/standby sever can hit the backend, is if it became the active/hot server. Now mind you, I'm not saying this functionality needs to be added. Merely saying if someone else has figured out a decent workaround, I'd love to hear about it (and apparently so would others on the list) On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 4:53 PM, Neil - HAProxy List <[email protected]> wrote: > So because one loadbal can reach the service the others can? > > Log spam needs getting rid of anyway. Filter it out whether its the in > service or one of the out of service loadbal. > > If you have a complex health check that creates load make it a little > smarter and cache its result for a while > > On Fri, 16 Dec 2016 at 19:56, Jeff Palmer <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> backend health should be in on the sticktables that are shared between >> >> all instances, right? >> >> >> >> With that in mind, the inactive servers would know the backed states >> >> if a failover were to occur. no sense in having the log spam, network >> >> traffic, and load from healthchecks that aree essentially useless >> >> (IMO, of course) >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 2:50 PM, Neil - HAProxy List >> >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > Stephan, >> >> > >> >> > I'm curious... >> >> > >> >> > Why would you want the inactive loadbal not to check the services? >> >> > >> >> > If you really really did want that you do something horrid like tell >> >> > keepalive to block with iptables access to the backends when it does not >> > own >> >> > the service ip >> >> > >> >> > but why? you healthchecks should be fairly lightweight? >> >> > >> >> > Neil >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > On 16 Dec 2016 15:44, "Marco Corte" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> Hi! >> >> >> >> >> >> I use keepalived for IP management. >> >> >> >> >> >> I use Ansible on another host to deploy the configuration on the >> >> haproxy >> >> >> nodes. >> >> >> This setup gives me better control on the configuration: it is split in >> >> >> several files on the Ansible host, but assembled to a single config >> >> file on >> >> >> the nodes. >> >> >> This gives also the opportunity to deploy the configuration on one node >> >> >> only. >> >> >> On the Ansible host, the configuration changes are tracked with git. >> >> >> >> >> >> I also considered an automatic replication of the config, between the >> >> >> nodes but... I did not like the idea. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> .marcoc >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Jeff Palmer >> >> https://PalmerIT.net >> > -- Jeff Palmer https://PalmerIT.net
