The case I was describing had backend being HTTP/1.1 and "Connection: Keep-Alive" issued by backend. In such case, I would think you'd want pound to reuse the connections. Otherwise, whats the point of having "Connection: Keep-Alives" on your backend with pound as your proxy?
You raise a good point here, definitely.
To us this is not a very big deal, as I changed our configuration to use IP address for session-binding. But this takes away a randomized distribution to the backends, in such case. I would think the 2 settings should not be inter-dependent.
At least from where I stand right now, I like the fact that requests are spread even across my backends. I find this is extremely helpful in debugging, since if one backend gets out of sync with the others, its just a matter of hitting refresh to expose it.
So I agree with you that this is a desirable feature, but for me the performance increase wouldn't be so great that I'd be willing to give up the ease for finding problems. I can definitely see where if my traffic grew, I might want this.
Regards, -- Dave Steinberg http://www.geekisp.com/ http://www.steinbergcomputing.com/ -- To unsubscribe send an email with subject unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions.
