hi,
On Fri, May 02, 2014 at 11:11:39AM -0600, Jeff Zellner wrote:
> Well, I thought wrong -- I see that peered sticky tables absolutely
> don't work with multiple processes, and sticky rules give a warning.
>
> Would that be a feature on the roadmap? I can see that it's probably
> pretty non-trivial -- but would be super useful, at least for us.
Yes that's clearly on the roadmap. In order of fixing/improvements,
here's what I'd like to see :
- peers work fine when only one process uses them
- have the ability to run with explicit peers per process : if you
"just" have to declare as many peers sections as processes, it's
better than nothing.
- have stick-table (and peers) work in multi-process mode with a
shared memory system like we do with SSL contexts.
Currently the issue is that all processes try to connect to the remote
and present the same peer name, resulting in the previous connection to
be dropped. And incoming connections will only feed one process and not
the other ones.
I'd like to be able to do at least #1 for the release, I do think it's
doable, because I attempted it 18 months ago and ended up in a complex
corner case of inter-proxy dependence calculation, to only realize that
we didn't need to have haproxy automatically deduce everything, just let
it do what the user wants, and document the limits.
Regards,
Willy
