Hi Chris, We run a bunch of 6400s in production.
You have to terminate the lines with the /r too GET /heartbeat/index HTTP/1.1 \r\n \r\n Our's looks like http://jxh.bingodisk.com/public/mongrel-bigip.png Regards, Jason On Aug 10, 2007, at 7:30 PM, Christopher Bailey wrote: > That didn't work. I don't think you need that though. If I just > telnet in to the Mongrel, and do a pure "GET /heartbeat.html HTTP/ > 1.1\n\n" it works. I am going to try running the Mongrel in debug > and see, will do that later tonight... > > > On 8/10/07, Brandorr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I think you > need to close the connection after each health check. > Otherwise mongrel/rails is going to block. (If my understanding is > correct. > > Try the following health check and let me know how it works out: > > "GET / HTTP/1.1\nHost: \nConnection: Close\n > > On 8/10/07, Christopher Bailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > If this has already been covered, please point me to that (I > didn't find > > anything in my searches)... > > > > We are using F5 BigIP LTM load balancers. They have many pools > of Mongrels > > they load balance across, and I of course want the F5 to know > when a Mongrel > > goes down or is unavailable, etc. To do that, I need to have an > F5 health > > monitor for HTTP make a request to the Mongrel. We do this same > thing with > > our Nginx servers, and that works fine, but with Mongrel it > doesn't. I am > > wondering if anyone is successfully monitoring Mongrel instances > from an F5? > > > > > > As further info... I've been working with F5 tech support on > this, and > > we're both stumped at the moment. The same HTTP monitor works > fine with > > Nginx. Both try to fetch the same HTML file. Also, if I am > ssh'ed in to > > the F5, and do a telnet to one of the Mongrels and do "GET / > heartbeat.html > > HTTP/1.1", followed by two returns, this works fine. I use that > same string > > (and two \n's) in my F5's send string for it's HTTP monitor. > According to > > F5 who looked at our tcpdump, the Mongrel just never responds > (but in the > > same dump, they see the direct telnet version respond fine). The > F5 makes a > > direct TCP request to do this. > > > > Any ideas? Suggestions? Known issue? Workarounds? Anyone > successful with > > this type of setup? > > > > As an FYI, our system info: > > > > CentOS 5, nearly all up to date, 64bit, Core 2 Duo processor > > Mongrel 1.0.1 > > Mongrel Cluster 1.0.2 > > Ruby 1.8.5 (2006-08-25) [x86_64-linux] > > > > F5 BigIP LTM, currently running 9.1.2 (working on moving to 9.3) > > > > _______________________________________________ Mongrel-users mailing list Mongrel-users@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/mongrel-users
