I'm a little mystified as to the usefulness of this as well. I mean,
what does hashing the domain name solve that just balancing back to a
bunch of Apache instances with virtual hosting turned on doesn't? Are
you saying that you have domains like en.example.com, fr.example.com
and you want them all to be sticky to the same backend server when
they balance? If that's the case, I could see that being useful if the
site in question were doing some sort of expensive per-user asset
generation that was being cached on the server. Is this what you are
talking about?
John L. Singleton
jsing...@gmail.com
On Mar 29, 2009, at 9:05 AM, Jeffrey 'jf' Lim wrote:
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 8:02 PM, Benoit <maver...@maverick.eu.org>
wrote:
diff -ru haproxy-1.3.15.7/doc/configuration.txt haproxy-1.3.15.7-
cur/doc/configuration.txt
--- haproxy-1.3.15.7/doc/configuration.txt 2008-12-04
11:29:13.000000000 +0100
+++ haproxy-1.3.15.7-cur/doc/configuration.txt 2009-02-24
16:17:19.000000000 +0100
@@ -788,6 +788,19 @@
balance url_param <param> [check_post [<max_wait>]]
+ header The Http Header specified in argument will be
looked up in
+ each HTTP request.
+
+ With the "Host" header name, an optionnal
use_domain_only
+ parameter is available, for reducing the hash
algorithm to
+ the main domain part, eg for "haproxy.1wt.eu",
only "1wt"
+ will be taken into consideration.
+
I'm not so sure how balancing based on a hash of the Host header would
be useful. How would this be useful? I would see an application for
balancing on perhaps other headers (like xff as mentioned), but for
Host... I dunno... (so basically what I'm saying is, is the code for
the 'use_domain_only' bit useful? can it be left out?)
-jf
--
In the meantime, here is your PSA:
"It's so hard to write a graphics driver that open-sourcing it would
not help."
-- Andrew Fear, Software Product Manager, NVIDIA Corporation
http://kerneltrap.org/node/7228
