Hi Aleksandar,
I have take a look into the code and have just some questions about
> calloc in [PATCH 03/11] & [PATCH 07/11]
>
> In the function dns_alloc_resolution is calloc used, would the use of
> haproxy pools bring any benefit?
>
>
it may help a bit from memory usage point of view.
I planned to use them, but since I was blocking other devs, I used the
quickest and safest way for now.
Let say I'll improve this for HAProxy 1.9, unless I find some time before
1.8 is ready.
> [PATCH 08/11]
> +static int dns_cache_size = 1024; /* arbitrary DNS cache size */
>
> For the future maybe there could be a glolbal.tune.dns-cache-size or
> something similar.
>
Ah yes!
I take the point :)
>
> Do I have understand the code right that you have per resolver a cache
> and this resolver belongs to a backend/frontend.
>
>
A cache belong to a "resolvers" section. Many servers (for now) or any
requester (later) can use the same "resolvers", hence benefit from the
cached responses.
> So in case several backends have the same server names all resolver
> requests this server individual.
> There is no 'global dns cache' for all or I missed something.
>
>
No.
Take a look at this configuration:
resolvers mydns
...
frontend ft
...
backend b1
server s1 myappsrv1.domain.com:80 resolvers mydns # no need "check"
anymore :)
backend b2
server s1 myappsrv1.domain.com:80 resolvers mydns # no need "check"
anymore :)
Both b1/s1 and b2/s1 points to the same resolvers and one will benefit from
the cached response of the other one.
There is still one point though, the cache is per resolvers, but (for now)
based on family preference. Soon, Olivier or I will improve this by
enforcing the resolvers to perform both A and AAAA queries and cache both
response and let the requester pick-up the one he wants.
For now, the cache only stores the response of the latest query...
Baptiste
>
> > Please give it a try and report any issues you may spot :)
> >
> > Baptiste
>
> Regards
> Aleks
>
