Hi,
I'm trying to use keepalive http connections for proxy_pass directives
containing variables.
Currently it only works for named upstream blocks.
I'm wondering what would be the easiest way,
maybe setting peer->get to ngx_http_upstream_get_keepalive_peer and
kp->original_get_peer to ngx_http_upstream_get_round_robin_peer() towards
the end of ngx_http_create_round_robin_peer().
If I can figure how to set kp->conf to something sane this might work :)
Thoughts ?
Thank you,
Matthieu.
On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 10:21 PM, SplitIce <mat999@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ive been testing this on my localhost and one of my live servers (http
> backend) for a good week now, I haven't had any issues that I have noticed
> as of yet.
>
> Servers are Debian Lenny and Debian Squeeze (oldstable, stable)
>
> Hoping it will make it into the developer (1.1.x) branch soon :)
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 1:57 PM, liseen <liseen.wan@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> Could nginx keepalive work with HealthCheck? Does Maxim Dounin have a
>> support plan?
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 3:09 AM, David Yu <david.yu.ftw@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 2:47 AM, Maxim Dounin <mdounin@mdounin.ru> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello!
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Aug 03, 2011 at 01:53:30AM +0800, David Yu wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 1:50 AM, Maxim Dounin <mdounin@mdounin.ru>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > > Hello!
>>>> > >
>>>> > > On Wed, Aug 03, 2011 at 01:42:13AM +0800, David Yu wrote:
>>>> > >
>>>> > > > On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 1:36 AM, Maxim Dounin <mdounin@mdounin.ru>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > > Hello!
>>>> > > > >
>>>> > > > > On Tue, Aug 02, 2011 at 04:24:45PM +0100, António P. P. Almeida
>>>> wrote:
>>>> > > > >
>>>> > > > > > On 1 Ago 2011 17h07 WEST, mdounin@mdounin.ru wrote:
>>>> > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > > Hello!
>>>> > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > > JFYI:
>>>> > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > > Last week I posted patch to nginx-devel@ which adds
>>>> keepalive
>>>> > > > > > > support to various backends (as with upstream keepalive
>>>> module),
>>>> > > > > > > including fastcgi and http backends (this in turn means
>>>> nginx now
>>>> > > > > > > able to talk HTTP/1.1 to backends, in particular it now
>>>> > > > > > > understands chunked responses). Patch applies to 1.0.5 and
>>>> 1.1.0.
>>>> > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > > Testing is appreciated.
>>>> > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > > You may find patch and description here:
>>>> > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > >
>>>> > >
>>>> http://mailman.nginx.org/pipermail/nginx-devel/2011-July/001057.html
>>>> > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > > Patch itself may be downloaded here:
>>>> > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > > http://nginx.org/patches/patch-nginx-keepalive-full.txt
>>>> > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > > Upstream keepalive module may be downloaded here:
>>>> > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > > http://mdounin.ru/hg/ngx_http_upstream_keepalive/
>>>> > > > > > >
>>>> http://mdounin.ru/files/ngx_http_upstream_keepalive-0.4.tar.gz
>>>> > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > So *either* we use the patch or use the module. Correct?
>>>> > > > >
>>>> > > > > No, to keep backend connections alive you need module *and*
>>>> patch.
>>>> > > > > Patch provides foundation in nginx core for module to work with
>>>> > > > > fastcgi and http.
>>>> > > > >
>>>> > > > With a custom nginx upstream binary protocol, I believe
>>>> multiplexing will
>>>> > > > now be possible?
>>>> > >
>>>> > > ENOPARSE, sorry.
>>>> > >
>>>> > After some googling ...
>>>> > ENOPARSE is a nerdy term. It is one of the standard C library error
>>>> codes
>>>> > that can be set in the global variable "errno" and stands for Error No
>>>> > Parse. Since you didn't get it, I can thus conclude that unlike me you
>>>> are probably
>>>> > a normal, well adjusted human being ;-)
>>>>
>>>> Actually, this definition isn't true: there is no such error code,
>>>> it's rather imitation. The fact that author of definition claims
>>>> it's real error indicate that unlike me, he is normal, well
>>>> adjusted human being. ;)
>>>>
>>>> > Now I get it. Well adjusted I am.
>>>>
>>>> Now you may try to finally explain what you mean to ask in your
>>>> original message. Please keep in mind that your are talking to
>>>> somebody far from being normal and well adjusted. ;)
>>>>
>>>> Maxim Dounin
>>>>
>>>> p.s. Actually, I assume you are talking about fastcgi
>>>> multiplexing.
>>>
>>> Nope not fastcgi multiplexing. Multiplexing over a custom/efficient
>>> nginx binary protocol.
>>> Where requests sent to upstream include a unique id w/c the upstream will
>>> also send on response.
>>> This allows for asychronous, out-of-bands, messaging.
>>> I believe this is what mongrel2 is trying to do now ... though as an http
>>> server, it is nowhere near as robust/stable as nginx.
>>> If nginx implements this (considering nginx already has a lot of market
>>> share), it certainly would bring more developers/users in (especially the
>>> ones needing async, out-of-bands request handling)
>>>
>>>
>>> Short answer is: no, it's still not possible.
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> nginx mailing list
>>>> nginx@nginx.org
>>>> http://mailman.nginx.org/mailman/listinfo/nginx
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> When the cat is away, the mouse is alone.
>>> - David Yu
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> nginx mailing list
>>> nginx@nginx.org
>>> http://mailman.nginx.org/mailman/listinfo/nginx
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> nginx mailing list
>> nginx@nginx.org
>> http://mailman.nginx.org/mailman/listinfo/nginx
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Warez Scene http://thewarezscene.org Free Rapidshare Downloadshttp://www.nexusddl.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nginx mailing list
> nginx@nginx.org
> http://mailman.nginx.org/mailman/listinfo/nginx
>
>
_______________________________________________
nginx mailing list
nginx@nginx.org
http://mailman.nginx.org/mailman/listinfo/nginx
