> > I was just wondering what happens when I use source-hashing balancing > > and the target server is down... > > Will squid fallback to round-robin? > > It then acts pretty much as if the cache_peer line of the failed peer > isn't there, until it starts responding again. The clients gets > sourche-hash distributed among the other peers.
Cool, thx. Would the following work...? # u1 servers pool cache_peer 192.168.16.101 parent 80 0 no-query originserver no-digest no-netdb-exchange max-conn=256 sourcehash name=u1pool cache_peer 192.168.16.102 parent 80 0 no-query originserver no-digest no-netdb-exchange max-conn=256 sourcehash name=u1pool cache_peer 192.168.16.103 parent 80 0 no-query originserver no-digest no-netdb-exchange max-conn=256 sourcehash name=u1pool # u2 servers pool cache_peer 192.168.16.201 parent 80 0 no-query originserver no-digest no-netdb-exchange max-conn=256 sourcehash name=u2pool cache_peer 192.168.16.202 parent 80 0 no-query originserver no-digest no-netdb-exchange max-conn=256 sourcehash name=u2pool cache_peer 192.168.16.203 parent 80 0 no-query originserver no-digest no-netdb-exchange max-conn=256 sourcehash name=u2pool acl u1 url_regex ^http://u1 acl u2 url_regex ^http://u2 cache_peer_access u1pool allow u1 cache_peer_access u1pool deny u2 cache_peer_access u2pool allow u2 cache_peer_access u2pool deny u1 Won't there be a problem with the redundant 'name=u?pool' Thx, JD
