Hi Andreas,

My last question was more related to how within HAProxy, you decided
to forward one request to a particular backend.
What criteria are you using?

Anyway, your numbers are huge and so no simple workarounds may apply.

And unfortunately, the maxconn server parameter can't be changed using
HAProxy socket.

I'm sorry I can't help here.

Baptiste

On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Andreas Mock <andreas.m...@drumedar.de> wrote:
> Hi Baptiste,
>
> the answers to your questions:
>
> 1) No persistence needed. http(s)-Proxy (1.5.x)
> 2) 6 + x physical servers, 97 frontend services (IP-Port-Combinations),
> and almost any frontend service can be served by a service on the physical
> server.
> 3) currently round robin. Open for other advice.
>
> Best regards
> Andreas Mock
>
> P.S.: Would a logical grouping of servers (in terms of HA)
> to server groups with the ability to have config variables
> for server groups a meaningful feature request?
>
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Baptiste [mailto:bed...@gmail.com]
> Gesendet: Montag, 2. September 2013 11:50
> An: Andreas Mock
> Cc: haproxy@formilux.org
> Betreff: Re: Limits for physical server
>
> Hi,
>
> This is not easily doable out of the box, but some workarounds may be doable.
> Please let me know the few information below:
> - Do you need persistence?
> - how many servers?
> - how many backends?
> - how do you take routing decision between backends
>
> Baptiste
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 11:15 AM, Andreas Mock <andreas.m...@drumedar.de> 
> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I'm not sure if the following is doable:
>>
>> I have several servers (processes providing services) on
>> one physical server. Is there a way to limit the count
>> of connections for the physical server?
>>
>> backend num1
>>     server1 IP:Port1
>>     server2 IP:Port1
>> backend num2
>>     server1 IP:Port2
>>     server2 IP:Port2
>>
>> And I want to limit resources based on
>> the entities server1, server2 while sharing
>> their resources among the backends.
>>
>> Hint appreciated.
>>
>> Best regards
>> Andreas Mock
>>
>>
>

Reply via email to