>I suppose in this case the load balancer would run HOOK_MIDDLE, and >sticky would run HOOK_LAST.
cool, and then have the server just try them in that order? ie, if the sticky server went down, it just takes the next one from the list (and that list should be ordered well since it comes from the LB algorithm) correct assumption? Filip ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mladen Turk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Tomcat Developers List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2004 1:12 PM Subject: RE: Simple Sticky LB WAS: Invitation to HTTPD commiters in tomcat-dev Graham Leggett wrote: > > > Yes, but why would you wish to separate those? > > Because they are two separate behaviours that could quite > easily be used independantly of each other. > OK, it makes sense. > > > I'm not that familiar with mod_proxy code, so please no > hooks, not jet > > :) > > I am familiar with the code, so don't be afraid of the hooks, > as I'm quite willing to tell you where things go :) > So, where do you see a lb code in the mod_proxy tree. Do you have some ideas where will it fit? It would be also good if you could make some p-code of the mod_proxy or some data flow diagram. Also do you need our support on coding? It would be perhaps better that you write the function prototypes that need some lb behavior returnig somethig like not_implemented or just mark some /* TODO: ...*/ in the code. MT. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
