Thank you! This looks exactly what I was after. Sadly this seems to be only
available in 1.5. It will take a little while for me to test. Will let you
know if that worked with rabbit once tested.


On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 11:23 AM, Baptiste <bed...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> You may want to try "on-marked-down shutdown-sessions".
> I use it on long applications which require TCP connection established
> for a long time.
>
> Baptiste
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 9:25 AM, Andrei Chevenkov <ache...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Got it, thank you.
> >
> > On 17/01/2014 9:01 pm, "Dmitriy Samsonov" <dmitriy.samso...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> When you closing rabbit gracefully it sends 'DOWN' message to
> >> connected clients and you notice your clients reconnecting.
> >> I've tried in the past various ways to detect disconnects on HAProxy
> >> side, including playing with various TCPKA settings but nothing
> >> helped. (I was playing with 1.4)
> >>
> >> 2014/1/17 Andrei Chevenkov <ache...@gmail.com>:
> >> > Dmitry, thank you for the reply, but I would imagine that haproxy
> would
> >> > close all sessions on the DOWN nodes, regardless of the type of client
> >> > connecting and the protocol? Can this be enforced?
> >> >
> >> > I did implement producer ack, but that slows down publishes big time.
> >> > Have
> >> > also tried heartbeat and that did help, but this is initiated by the
> >> > client
> >> > and I would like to see if haproxy can manage this. I.e. close all
> >> > sessions
> >> > on a node that is marked as DOWN.
> >> >
> >> > On 17/01/2014 8:09 pm, "Dmitriy Samsonov" <dmitriy.samso...@gmail.com
> >
> >> > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Hi!
> >> >>
> >> >> That's related to rabbiit's default heartbeat timeout. You can set it
> >> >> to
> >> >> lower value when connecting. Also there is a way to check if message
> >> >> was
> >> >> actually delivered to the broker, take a look at rabbiit's docs.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> пятница, 17 января 2014 г. пользователь Andrei Chevenkov написал:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Hi,
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I am pretty new to haproxy and trying to do ha setup for rabbitmq.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Setup is pretyt simple:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> listen rabbitmq 192.168.69.106:5672
> >> >>>  mode    tcp
> >> >>>  balance leastconn
> >> >>>  option  tcplog
> >> >>>  option  tcpka
> >> >>>  server  rabbit01 192.168.69.107:5672 check inter 1000 downinter
> 5000
> >> >>> fall 1 on-error mark-down
> >> >>>  server  rabbit02 192.168.69.108:5672 check inter 1000 downinter
> 5000
> >> >>> fall 1 on-error mark-down backup
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Everything seems to work well, but I noticed one strange behaviour.
> If
> >> >>> I
> >> >>> gracefully shut down rabbit01, message producer (client) connected
> to
> >> >>> 192.168.69.106:5672 notices broken connection pretty much straight
> >> >>> away,
> >> >>> attempts a reconnect, hits rabbit02 and all is well.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> However if I simply "turn off" rabbit01, message producer (client)
> >> >>> notices broken connection only in around 30 seconds or so. And while
> >> >>> the
> >> >>> break is undetected it keeps pushing messages thinking there is
> still
> >> >>> someone on another side.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Now, from the statistic report I can see that as soon as I turn off
> >> >>> the
> >> >>> box, rabbit01 is marked as "DOWN", but its "Sessions Current" is
> still
> >> >>> set
> >> >>> to 1? In the logs this comes up pretty much immediately after the
> hard
> >> >>> turn
> >> >>> off:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Jan 17 17:13:51 prodlb01 haproxy[38459]: Server rabbitmq/rabbit01 is
> >> >>> DOWN, reason: Layer4 timeout, check duration: 1008ms. 0 active and 1
> >> >>> backup
> >> >>> servers left. Running on backup. 1 sessions active, 0 requeued, 0
> >> >>> remaining
> >> >>> in queue.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> After around 30 seconds, the connection is detected as broken and
> >> >>> failover happens successfully. At that time  "Sessions Current"  is
> >> >>> set to 0
> >> >>> fo rabbit01.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Tried option  nolinger and option  abortonclose, but no luck.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Any help would be much appreciated...
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Cheers,
> >> >>> Andrei
>

Reply via email to