httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Plüm, Rüdiger, VF EITO <>
Subject Re: load balancer "cluster" set
Date Mon, 31 Jul 2006 14:51:46 GMT

> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Jim Jagielski 

> In other words, lets assume members a, b and c are in
> set 0 and d, e and f are in set 1 and g, h and i are in
> set 2. We check a, b and c and they are not usable, so
> we now start checking set 1. Should we re-check the
> members in set 0 (maybe they are usable now) or
> just check members of set 1 (logically, the question
> is whether we doing a <= set# or == set#). I have
> both methods coded and am flip-flopping on which
> makes the most sense. I'm leaning towards #1 (<=set#).

I would also lean to #1 as this means that once cluster set 0
failed and is back again we are using it again, which seems
natural to me. OTH I guess we need to consider session stickyness
in this case. So sessions that have been migrated to set 1 should
stay there until they vanish or someone knocks them out by disabling
this cluster set (BTW:
 will it be possible to disable complete cluster sets via the manager?
)and thus forcing them back to cluster set 0.



View raw message