On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 3:45 PM Guillaume Quintard <[email protected]> wrote: > > I think it makes sense for Varnish to natively support backends changing > their IPs. I do get the performance argument but now that there is a > cloud/container market and that Varnish has proven to be useful in it, this > basic functionality should be brought in.
I would assume the primary argument was simplicity, not performance, but I wasn't around. One could argue it's turned into simplism in today's cloudy cloud cloudy world. > Would it be acceptable to add a "host_string" to vrt_endpoint and fill it if > the VCL backend isn't an IP, then, we can add another cp_methods to > cache_conn_pool.c to use it? This way IPs are still super fast, and hostnames > become actually useful and a bit less confusing? One problem I have (and that you should be familiar with) is that portable interfaces we have that *respect* the system configuration (hosts file, nsswitch configuration etc) are not providing enough information. For example it becomes cumbersome to resolve SRV records or even get the TTL of individual records for a DNS resolution in a *portable* fashion. When you put it like this, it sounds simple enough (dare I say simplistic?) but what I see is a sizeable can of worms. I do think we could do something about it, I don't know what would be satisfying. Cheers, Dridi _______________________________________________ varnish-misc mailing list [email protected] https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc
