On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 8:52 AM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote:
> Right now, the balancer manager allows for a member to be
> disabled/stopped, but it cannot *remove* that member...
> Seems to me that that would be good, especially since
> we could always re-use that slot.
>
That means you must fully implement locking against the backends table
in any use context, determine that there are no workers using that specific
backend, and then 'remove' it ('repurpose' it, really, since it's just
another
slot.) If there are any requests in-flight for that member, this will
result
in potentially bad collisions of misinformation.
We usually ignore these mis-attributions, but I'm not sure that's feasible
given all of the lb logic involved?
