On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 1:25 PM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: > > I WAS thinking about basically "making" HC_FAIL STOPPED because > that mode can only be set/cleared during configuration (the > balancer-manager doesn't provide for changing that bit) and so > for the life of me I can't figure out how or why anyone would be > using that status since it never changes... > > Maybe we can just say that STOPPED is there for potential > 3rd party uses and be done w/ it :)
That's what I started to respond before yours :) Pasting below... Some third-party (proxy_)modules may use DISABLED/STOPPED for their own purpose, but I wouldn't mind if the health check DISABLEs or STOPs a worker under them, these are httpd #defined yet... So I would have been for health check to reuse STOPPED for its own purpose (since DISABLED is exposed via the balancer-manager, we likely can't change its behaviour). But DISABLED/STOPPED are also configurable with BalancerMember's status=+D/S, and ~documented~ :) D: Worker is disabled and will not accept any requests. S: Worker is administratively stopped. Here both really mean "not started", so status=+S workers shouldn't be started later by the health check on its own, which prevents STOPPED reuse too. Thus, as you suggest, we need a different a new name for health check (HC_FAIL), so why join the two others (with a nice trick btw)? We probably need to keep their current/synonym meaning in httpd (at least in 2.4.x), and maybe we can let third party modules play with them distinctly after all :)
