On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 09:33:26 -0700 Alex Rousskov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-12-19 at 23:31 +1300, Amos Jeffries wrote: > > Squid is a little different in its peer requirements. The peering > > needs to be anchored off the name= parameter or in the absence of > > that the peer ip/fqdn given. In squid THAT must be unique for > > several other indexes similar to this. > > There is no requirement in squid that the IP/http-port combo be > > unique because the IP/icp-port combo may be the difference. Agreed; the odd thing is, there is no error handling in this case. Perhaps it would be worth giving some visible messages within cache.log too, if you have multiple cache_peers specified with the same IP, taking part in a CARP array. Currently, it's only looking to make sure there is a name= to make them distinct as far as I can tell. I've modified my code so that it now hashes on names if "carp_hash_name on" is in the squid.conf. It will fall back to the old method if it is either off, missing, or if p->name is empty. > What if Squid is not the only device doing CARP in a given > environment? It may be important to allow the administrator to > configure Squid hashing to match that of other devices so "extending" > the hashing specs may require an option to turn the extensions off. Agreed; as per this, the default option is for this extension to be disabled by default, and must be explicitly enabled within the squid.conf using the carp_hash_name config option. http://www.squid-cache.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=2153 is updated with the latest patch. -- Tony Dodd, Systems Administrator Last.fm | http://www.last.fm Karen House 1-11 Baches Street London N1 6DL check out my music taste at: http://www.last.fm/user/hawkeviper
