> Mmmm, this may be a misunderstanding, the context was PRIV_* scopes > for backends, such as PRIV_TASK or PRIV_TOP. I would argue that > creating backends at the beginning of such a scope and removing them > at the end is such an unlikely solution that we should consider not > supporting it.
As long as it gets out of VCL (end-user) scope before you delete it, it's fine. > But it sounds like you're saying backends should not be deleted under > any circumstances. That I don't agree with. I'm saying this for static backends. That would make dynamic backends pointless if you couldn't add/delete them dynamically. My point is more that if you made a dynamic round-robin director for instance. You could either return a wrapper director that resolve the right backend when the resolve function is called or simply return the leaf director directly to VCL code. Returning the leaf director would be error-prone if you can delete it concurrently, that's what I'm against. > What should I do about backends that cease to exist, in a context > where it's not workable to reload a new static backend configuration? I don't understand this question. If you need a backend that can be reloaded dynamically, you shouldn't use a static backend. > That's what I want the runtime backend delete for. And you can VRT_delete_backend any backend created with VRT_new_backend. _______________________________________________ varnish-dev mailing list [email protected] https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-dev
