Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-httpd-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 51708 invoked from network); 6 May 2009 17:08:40 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 6 May 2009 17:08:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 74517 invoked by uid 500); 6 May 2009 17:08:39 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-httpd-dev-archive@httpd.apache.org Received: (qmail 74454 invoked by uid 500); 6 May 2009 17:08:39 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Reply-To: dev@httpd.apache.org list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@httpd.apache.org Received: (qmail 74445 invoked by uid 99); 6 May 2009 17:08:39 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 06 May 2009 17:08:39 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of jim@jagunet.com designates 209.133.192.6 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.133.192.6] (HELO jaguNET.com) (209.133.192.6) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 06 May 2009 17:08:29 +0000 Received: from [192.168.71.11] ([67.211.10.137]) by devsys.jaguNET.com (jagunet-1.1/jagunet-1.1) with ESMTP id n46H88aA028769 for ; Wed, 6 May 2009 13:08:09 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from jim@jaguNET.com) Message-Id: <69039168-65D6-4194-A8AF-415FA4CB17F6@jaguNET.com> From: Jim Jagielski To: dev@httpd.apache.org In-Reply-To: <4A01C230.6050100@rowe-clan.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) Subject: Re: mod_proxy / mod_proxy_balancer Date: Wed, 6 May 2009 13:08:05 -0400 References: <49FFFCB5.7060701@gmail.com> <4A003FF6.5090509@gmail.com> <4A005213.9040904@apache.org> <4A0057B1.5000803@gmail.com> <4A00644B.9050509@gmail.com> <1342264E-706D-4D6C-B123-89C8A07AC543@jaguNET.com> <4A0074FC.500@gmail.com> <678D1F35-6228-41C6-B09A-E1F2B330B848@jaguNET.com> <4A008D39.6040508@gmail.com> <4A00A48C.1020908@gmail.com> <4A014463.7070200@kippdata.de> <4A014BED.3020108@ptc.com> <638BD552-9525-41BF-BDFB-D41CFD920740@jaguNET.com> <4A01C230.6050100@rowe-clan.net> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org 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 :)