Thanks for the quick reply Carlo, but actually sending the immediate ok *is* what we want. We just want haproxy to continue queuing the messages and sending them after it's returned an 'ok' to the requesting server.
The people who wrote that page are basically limiting the number of connections to the mysql backend server, but (AFAICT) this just pushes the bottleneck back up to haproxy. Applying this setup to our situation, the requesting server (PHP script) is still going to maintain a connection to haproxy and will be forced to wait until haproxy can send the request to the backend server and then return the ok response back to the script, which will only then be able to continue executing. At least that's my understanding of how it would work, please set me straight if I'm wrong though! Kind regards, Guy On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 5:22 PM, carlo flores <ca...@petalphile.com> wrote: > Hi Guy, > > If you only want HAProxy to queue connections and not send that immediate > "ok" any longer, check out how these folks are doing it to queue to MySQL. > http://flavio.tordini.org/a-more-stable-mysql-with-haproxy/comment-page-1 > > > On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 5:15 PM, g...@desgames.com <g...@desgames.com>wrote: > >> Actually, I should clarify something. We don't really actually want the >> 'black hole' situation I described - instead, what we want is for haproxy to >> accept and queue the messages that come in from the requesting server, but >> to still deliver them when a backend server becomes available. In this way, >> the requesting process can continue executing and not having to wait for a >> response. Obviously, we intend to do this only for async type calls. >> >> >> On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 4:52 PM, g...@desgames.com <g...@desgames.com>wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> We have a tcp service we'd like to proxy requests to, and we were >>> investigating haproxy as a possible solution for our requirements. So far, >>> it doesn't seem like haproxy is suitable but I thought I'd run it by the >>> community to confirm what I understand to be the case. >>> >>> What we want is a proxy that will accept tcp connections on a specific >>> port and always send a tcp 'ok' response to the requesting process whether >>> or not there is a backend server available. If a backend server (we only >>> plan on having one at the moment) is available then we want the request >>> passed transparently through to the backend server. If the backend server is >>> *not* available, then we want haproxy to operate as a kind of 'black hole', >>> and just accept whatever is sent to it, dumping it to the equivalent of >>> /dev/null. Basically, acting as an equivalent of the backend server. >>> >>> Is the above possible with haproxy? Based on what I've read in the >>> configuration documentation, the answer is no. However, there are a *lot* of >>> options in there so I thought perhaps there's some obscure setting which >>> would allow this to work. >>> >>> Alternatively, does anyone know of a utility that could do what we want? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Guy >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Guy Knights >> Systems Administrator >> DES Games >> www.desgames.com >> g...@desgames.com >> > > -- Guy Knights Systems Administrator DES Games www.desgames.com g...@desgames.com
