On Thursday, May 24, 2012 01:59:32 AM Willy Tarreau wrote: > On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 01:12:14AM -0700, Justin Karneges wrote: > > Well, the network could fail at anytime and have a similar effect. I'm > > not sure if killing all connections to the backup is really any worse > > than killing all connections to the non-backup (via on-marked-down). > > Either way a bunch of client errors may occur, but for a scenario that > > is hopefully rare. > > Killing connections when something fails is acceptable to many people, > but killing connections when everything goes well is generally not > accepted.
This is certainly a sensible philosophy. I think what makes my scenario special is that the backup server is functionally worse than the non-backup. So even though we are discussing a destructive response to a positive event, it's the quickest way to get the service out of a degraded state. > > Maybe an "on-marked-up shutdown-backup-sessions" option would be good. > > I was thinking about something like this, but I still have doubts about > its real usefulness. I don't know what others think here. If there is > real demand for this and people think it serves a real purpose, I'm fine > with accepting a patch to implement it. Thanks for being open. I'll mull this over some more and consider making a patch. Justin
