4 ms·
My gut feeling is that this approach can be prone to silent misbehavior that they cannot detect. There's no reason not to patch HA to reload it's config and re
by halayli 12y ago
My gut feeling is that this approach can be prone to silent misbehavior that they cannot detect.
There's no reason not to patch HA to reload it's config and reapply it.
- meatmanek 12y agoWe're using this for internal load balancing, so we control both ends of the connection. If this started misbehaving, we'd see timeouts, dropped connections, or errors, which would show up in logs.
- halayli 12y agoI see. Any reason not to patch HA to reload config?
- meatmanek 12y agoNot sure; I'm not the author of the post (a colleague), but I'd guess it's a fairly complicated patch. I know the author has made some changes to the HAProxy codebase[1], so I'm sure he considered it. [1] http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.haproxy/21025 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.haproxy/21025
- jolynch 12y agoPatching HAProxy to reload config is really hard. There have been ideas, patches, and discussions on the HAProxy mailing list for a few years now trying to get zero downtime reloads natively supported in HAProxy, but the reality is that it just is not as easy as it might seem. For more details check out the mailing list: http://marc.info/?l=haproxy http://marc.info/?l=haproxy