httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <>
Subject Re: mod_proxy / mod_proxy_balancer
Date Wed, 06 May 2009 17:08:05 GMT

On May 6, 2009, at 1:00 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:

> Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> That's why oob-like health-and-status chatter is nice, because
>> it doesn't interfere with the normal reverse-proxy/host logic.
> +1, for a backend of unknown status (let's just say it's a few minutes
> old, effectively useless information now) ping/pong is the right first
> approach.  But...
>> An idea: Instead of asking for this info before sending the
>> request, what about the backend sending it as part of the response,
>> as a response header. You don't know that status of the machine
>> "now", but you do know the status of it right after it handled the  
>> last
>> request (the last time you saw it) and, assuming nothing else touched
>> it, that status is likely still "good".
> Yup; that seems like the only sane approach, add an X-Backend-Status  
> or
> whatnot to report the load or other health data.

For example, how long it took me (the backend server) to handle
this request... would be useful to know *that* in additional to
the typical "round-trip" time :)

View raw message