Re: Haproxy & un-usual session tracking

On Mon, Nov 26, 2007 at 09:44:25PM +0100, Benoit wrote:
> >
> >From: Aleksandar Lazic <al-haproxy#none.at
> ><mailto:al-haproxy#none.at?Subject=Re:%20Haproxy%20&amp;%20un-usual%20session%20tracking>>
> >
> >Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 00:14:37 +0100
> >
> >
> >Hi,
> >
> >On Son 25.11.2007 23:27, Benoit wrote:
> >//Have you looked into the
> >http://haproxy.1wt.eu/download/1.3/doc/architecture.txt doc ;-)
> >
>
> Well yes, the point of the message is that i can't use this kind of
> method (cookie)
> cause it won't have the effect i'm looking after.
>
> >What happens if all backends send the same host-header?!
> Well, the "Host" header isn't sent by a back-end, it's the virtualhost
> requested by the web browser.
> In fact what i'm looking for is kinda the same thing done by the
> "balance uri" configuration, just i need to
> balance on the virtualhost part.
> >
> >/> Any hint ?/
> >
> >Maybe the '2.11) Application Cookies' can help?
> >
> Well no, as i said before i can't, it would need to make each back-end
> server aware of a global vhost/backend association table
> which is somewhat easier to do in the load-balancer
>
> >It will help when you try to explain/declare what/which application
> >server you have ;-)
> >
> I don't see how it could help, anyway this i'm not allowed to say (or
> maybe i'm too ashamed of, pick your choice :) )

OK I understand what you want. Currently we don't do that. It's not hard to implement, at least for the easiest part which would consist in header hashing, and it's planned for a later version, when core features will have settled down.

A more complete solution will involve stickiness on anything, including headers or url parameters. But I really, really suggest that you go for hashing instead of stickiness.

Right now, if your number of hosts is really limited, maybe you can simply write a few ACLs and statically assign each of them to one server ?

Regards,
Willy Received on 2007/11/26 22:16