AW: AW: proxy failover/load balance

2006-02-01 Thread Plüm , Rüdiger , VIS
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Robby Pedrica Hi Rudiger, I've applied patches and recompiled. My results are as follows: 1. apache starts up with the member 'b' disabled now 2. if I shutdown the working member 'a' httpd, then manager shows the change only when you try and

Re: AW: AW: proxy failover/load balance

2006-02-01 Thread Robby Pedrica
Plm wrote: -Ursprngliche Nachricht- Von: Robby Pedrica Hi Rudiger, I've applied patches and recompiled. My results are as follows: 1. apache starts up with the member 'b' disabled now 2. if I shutdown the working member 'a' httpd, then manager shows the change only

AW: AW: AW: proxy failover/load balance

2006-02-01 Thread Plüm , Rüdiger , VIS
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Robby Pedrica Thanks Rudiger, I've set redirect and route values - not sure if these are correct: Proxy balancer://mycluster BalancerMember http://192.168.4.2:80 redirect=1 BalancerMember http://192.168.4.3:80 route=1 status=D /Proxy I'm

AW: AW: AW: proxy failover/load balance

2006-02-01 Thread Plüm , Rüdiger , VIS
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Plüm, Rüdiger, This only works with session stickyness. So ProxyPass / balancer://mycluster stickysession=SESSION_COOKIE Proxy balancer://mycluster BalancerMember http://192.168.4.2:80 route=a redirect=b BalancerMember http://192.168.4.3:80

Re: AW: AW: proxy failover/load balance

2006-02-01 Thread Jim Jagielski
I think we're in agreement that the current failover does not work as it should with HTTP, and is quite cumbersome to get it to work. :) I hope to later on this week work on code that has a real hot standby status, and avoids the requirement for sticky sessions. It won't replace what's in there

AW: AW: AW: proxy failover/load balance

2006-02-01 Thread Plüm , Rüdiger , VIS
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Jim Jagielski I think we're in agreement that the current failover does not work as it should with HTTP, and is quite cumbersome to get it to work. :) Apart from the fact that it currently does not even work without patches :-). So I am keen on

AW: AW: proxy failover/load balance

2006-02-01 Thread Plüm , Rüdiger , VIS
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Jim Jagielski Why the breaks? Certainly we still want to continue the for loop even if we see a valid setting. For example, to set a worker in DISABLED and STOPPED mode. 1. Currently there is no clear separation letter. 2. Setting status=disabled

Re: AW: AW: AW: proxy failover/load balance

2006-02-01 Thread Jim Jagielski
On Feb 1, 2006, at 9:02 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, VIS wrote: -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Jim Jagielski I think we're in agreement that the current failover does not work as it should with HTTP, and is quite cumbersome to get it to work. :) Apart from the fact that it currently does

AW: AW: AW: AW: proxy failover/load balance

2006-02-01 Thread Plüm , Rüdiger , VIS
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Jim Jagielski On Feb 1, 2006, at 9:02 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, VIS wrote: So I am keen on feedback by Robby. I hope to find time to commit these changes to the trunk tonight, so that it works at least in the cumbersome way :-). I will cut the

Re: AW: AW: AW: AW: proxy failover/load balance

2006-02-01 Thread Robby Pedrica
Plm wrote: -Ursprngliche Nachricht- Von: Jim Jagielski On Feb 1, 2006, at 9:02 AM, Plm, Rdiger, VIS wrote: So I am keen on feedback by Robby. I hope to find time to commit these changes to the trunk