[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Tue, 14 May 2002, Bernd Koecke wrote: > > >>Hi Costin, >> >>the new patch seems to work, but I'll test it more exactly tomorrow. Then I'll >>create the patches and the functional description. >> >>In short, the patched lb_worker uses an additinal flag on the other workers (e.g >>worker.ajp13.local_worker=1) to determine if it should be moved to the beginning >>of the balanced_workers. So we don't need to deal with two lists in lb_worker >>and the lb_value '0' has no special meaning. The flag for sending requests only >>to local workers is 'local_worker_only' on the lb_worker. More when the patch is >>tested and ready. > > > Ok. I already commited part of the changes for jk2 - but my version is > called 'hwBalanceErr', on worker_lb. > > If 0 normal selection of non-local workers takes place if all locals are > in error state. If non 0, we'll return the value as the error code - for > a front-end balancer to detect and stop forwarding requests for this > instance. > > I think that's the behavior you need - and it also allows customization > for the returned error code. >
That sounds great, many thanks! The patch for jk1 is on the way and I added some explanation how it works and about the two config flags. Bernd > Costin > > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > -- Dipl.-Inform. Bernd Koecke UNIX-Entwicklung Schlund+Partner AG Fon: +49-721-91374-0 E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
