=?iso-8859-1?Q?Pl=FCm=2C_R=FCdiger=2C_VIS?= wrote:
-Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht-
Von: Jim Jagielski
to do here.
=20
Ok, but this actually works already without your patch.
=20
I never even bothered to check... Brian's initial
Email said that it didn't. Are you saying
On Mar 23, 2006, at 9:59 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, VIS wrote:
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Jim Jagielski
I want to be able to use same balancer in multiple vhosts.
This is actually that way by design, iirc. I've no
real issues with it being Vhost specific or inheritable.
So if
On Mar 27, 2006, at 10:27 AM, Brian Akins wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
Something like this maybe? Of course, since it's inherited,
the balancer shows up twice in the balancer-manager, but
maybe that make sense :)
Shouldn't it just appear once? That's just my thinking...
Well, there
Jim Jagielski wrote:
Well, there *are* 2 balancers... but yeah, it is quite
confusing, and there are things that need to be
further addressed here.
I'm think of what if someone had a script that parses the
balancer-manager output. it would be very confusing to figure out which
is the
Brian Akins wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
Well, there *are* 2 balancers... but yeah, it is quite
confusing, and there are things that need to be
further addressed here.
I'm think of what if someone had a script that parses the
balancer-manager output. it would be very confusing to
Jim Jagielski wrote:
When each Vhost is merged, they
grab a copy of the main server's balancer config setup.
So you have 2 balancers, one of which isn't used at
all (the main server's) and one that is.
my very silly global_balancers patch fixes that.
--
Brian Akins
Lead Systems Engineer
Brian Akins wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
When each Vhost is merged, they
grab a copy of the main server's balancer config setup.
So you have 2 balancers, one of which isn't used at
all (the main server's) and one that is.
my very silly global_balancers patch fixes that.
Yes,
On 03/27/2006 05:15 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Mar 23, 2006, at 9:59 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, VIS wrote:
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Jim Jagielski
I want to be able to use same balancer in multiple vhosts.
This is actually that way by design, iirc. I've no
real issues with
Ruediger Pluem wrote:
Proxy balancer://fill
BalancerMember http://server1:80 route=server1
BalancerMember http://server2:80 route=server2
/Proxy
VirtualHost A
...
ProxyPass /path balancer://fill/ stickysession=Sticky
/VirtualHost
VirtualHost B
...
ProxyPass /path
On Mar 27, 2006, at 2:55 PM, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
Proxy balancer://fill
BalancerMember http://server1:80 route=server1
BalancerMember http://server2:80 route=server2
/Proxy
VirtualHost A
...
ProxyPass /path balancer://fill/ stickysession=Sticky
/VirtualHost
VirtualHost
Brian Akins wrote:
I want them to share the balancer. Currently, they do not fully.
Or have I confused my self...
Nah, I understand perfectly :)
VHosts should have access to any balancer defined at the
main server level. I think we're all in agreement here.
The issue is whether vhosts
On 03/27/2006 10:03 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
What we needed to avoid was the case where a balancer defined in
VhostA leaked into VhostB. You should not be able to define
balancers in one Vhost and have them available in others; it's
That makes things clearer to me. Thanks. BTW: I agree
Ruediger Pluem wrote:
On 03/27/2006 10:03 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
What we needed to avoid was the case where a balancer defined in
VhostA leaked into VhostB. You should not be able to define
balancers in one Vhost and have them available in others; it's
That makes things
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Jim Jagielski
to do here.
Ok, but this actually works already without your patch.
I never even bothered to check... Brian's initial
Email said that it didn't. Are you saying that his Email
is wrong and that balancers defined in the main
I'm not sure if balancers defined in VHost sections
should be available globally. I'm much more comfy
with top level balancers being inherited by
VHosts (bubbling down) but not bubbling up or over :)
Would that match what you're looking for?
On Mar 23, 2006, at 12:10 PM, Akins, Brian wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
Would that match what you're looking for?
Yes. Wasn't sure how to word it. The issue is, I think, that add_pass
gets ran before megre.
--
Brian Akins
Lead Systems Engineer
CNN Internet Technologies
Brian Akins wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
Would that match what you're looking for?
Yes. Wasn't sure how to word it. The issue is, I think, that add_pass
gets ran before megre.
Yeah... need to look into how to do it without making the
whole shebang global. I have some cycles this
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Jim Jagielski
I want to be able to use same balancer in multiple vhosts.
This is actually that way by design, iirc. I've no
real issues with it being Vhost specific or inheritable.
So if others think it's worthwhile having the above
18 matches
Mail list logo
