EY Load balancer - Does this work with the newest dev ve

Maxim Dounin mdounin at mdounin.ru
Tue Apr 28 16:18:14 MSD 2009


On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 12:05:44PM +0200, Ryan Dahl wrote:

> > I don't suppose you could restructure things so that only the module is
> > needed. The upstream-fair patch seems to get away without having to
> > patch nginx source.
> I don't think it is possible to achieve the request queuing
> functionality without modifying Nginx's source.  The patch is a small
> change and does not affect how other modules work - it would be nice
> if it could be merged.
> Igor:
> http://github.com/ry/nginx-ey-balancer/blob/afccd5c15e10257e675fb56715dd7d63bfcf4ffc/patches/nginx-0.6.34.patch
> It adds a new return value, NGX_BUSY, for the peer.init() callback in
> upstream modules. In the case of this, the module can itself decide to
> when to call ngx_http_upstream_connect() - until then the request
> hangs.

>From architectural point of view it shouldn't be returned from 
peer.init() but instead from peer.get().  It's not easy to 
implement this for peer.get() though - that's probably why 
peer.init() was used instead.

Basically the above patch is a "quick hack" and I don't think it 
should be merged.

Maxim Dounin

More information about the nginx mailing list