On 16-12-19 16:01:08, Stephan Müller wrote:
> Different services on the same host, so it has also different health checks,
> balance policies and so on..
Alright -- please show this in your code, next time.
TIA and all the best,
Georg
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Different services on the same host, so it has also different health
checks, balance policies and so on..
On 19.12.2016 15:46, ge...@riseup.net wrote:
On 16-12-19 08:39:17, Stephan Müller wrote:
Another point I encounter frequently, I use the same server (IPs) in
multiple backends, this duplic
On 16-12-19 08:39:17, Stephan Müller wrote:
> Another point I encounter frequently, I use the same server (IPs) in
> multiple backends, this duplicates configuration.
>
> SRV1_IP=192.168.0.1
> CHECK_INTER=1
>
> backend foo
> server service1 $SRV1_IP check inter $CHCECK_INTER
>
> backend ba
Il 16/12/2016 20:54, Guillaume Bourque ha scritto:
Hello Marco,
I would be very interest on how you build your harpy config, you must
have per server settings and then a global config ?
On the Ansible Control Machine the configuration is split in several
files named either ".common" or in ".
Well, i have some health checks which are not very lightweight (don't
ask, another story). So its better to reduce its number to bare minimum.
Actually it would be quite cool, if you can use variables in you
configuration. And moreover if you can change these vars at runtime, it
would be aweso
I didn't say that if one can hit it, they all can.
However, if you want to use that logic, then I'd counter with.. if
it's not currently the active instance, it doesn't matter if it can or
not. Thus, why do the health check?
The only time it'd matter if the inactive/standby sever can hit the
ba
So because one loadbal can reach the service the others can?
Log spam needs getting rid of anyway. Filter it out whether its the in
service or one of the out of service loadbal.
If you have a complex health check that creates load make it a little
smarter and cache its result for a while
On Fri,
backend health should be in on the sticktables that are shared between
all instances, right?
With that in mind, the inactive servers would know the backed states
if a failover were to occur. no sense in having the log spam, network
traffic, and load from healthchecks that aree essentially usele
Hello Marco,
I would be very interest on how you build your harpy config, you must have per
server settings and then a global config ?
If time permit and if you can share some unusable config I would be very happy
to look into this..
Thanks
---
Guillaume Bourque, B.Sc.,
Architecte infrastruct
Stephan,
I'm curious...
Why would you want the inactive loadbal not to check the services?
If you really really did want that you do something horrid like tell
keepalive to block with iptables access to the backends when it does not
own the service ip
but why? you healthchecks should be fairly
Hi!
I use keepalived for IP management.
I use Ansible on another host to deploy the configuration on the haproxy
nodes.
This setup gives me better control on the configuration: it is split in
several files on the Ansible host, but assembled to a single config file
on the nodes.
This gives als
I would be interested in seeing the ansible playbook, if it's sanitized?
On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 10:19 AM, Michel blanc
wrote:
> Le 16/12/2016 à 16:08, Jeff Palmer a écrit :
>
>>> Hi
>>> I would like to know what is the best way to have multiple instances of
>>> haproxy and have or share the
On 16-12-16 16:19:09, Michel blanc wrote:
> Here I use pacemaker+corosync and 2 VIPs (+ round robin DNS) so all
> haproxy instances are active. In case of failure, failed VIP is
> "moved" to the remaining instance (which then holds the 2 VIPs).
Doing this as well. Also, pacemaker/corosync enables
Le 16/12/2016 à 16:08, Jeff Palmer a écrit :
>> Hi
>> I would like to know what is the best way to have multiple instances of
>> haproxy and have or share the same configuration file between these
>> instances.
> If you find a solution to the health checks from unused instances, let us
> know!
If you find a solution to the health checks from unused instances, let us know!
On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 10:05 AM, Stephan Müller
wrote:
>
>
> On 16.12.2016 14:58, shouldbeq931 wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 16 Dec 2016, at 13:22, Allan Moraes wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi
>>> I would like to know what is the bes
On 16.12.2016 14:58, shouldbeq931 wrote:
On 16 Dec 2016, at 13:22, Allan Moraes wrote:
Hi
I would like to know what is the best way to have multiple instances of haproxy
and have or share the same configuration file between these instances.
I use keepalived to present clustered addresse
> On 16 Dec 2016, at 13:22, Allan Moraes wrote:
>
> Hi
> I would like to know what is the best way to have multiple instances of
> haproxy and have or share the same configuration file between these instances.
I use keepalived to present clustered addresses, and incrond with unison to
keep c
Hi
I would like to know what is the best way to have multiple instances of
haproxy and have or share the same configuration file between these
instances.
18 matches
Mail list logo