/ Zope / Apsis / Pound Mailing List / Archive / 2007 / 2007-03 / Pound ignores one backend

[ << ] [ >> ]

[ pound 2.5.5 LogLevel, not working failure detect ... ] [ ANNOUNCE: Pound - reverse proxy and load balancer ... ]

Pound ignores one backend
Robert Klikics <robert.klikics(at)unitedprint.com>
2007-03-01 18:51:07 [ FULL ]
Hello,

after upgrading to the actual version pound seems to ignore one backend.
Yesterday it seemed to be the node with 192.168.12.22, but today - after 
a pound restart - it is 192.168.12.20!
I can see that some requests coming through, but only on of a hundred or 
something ... that's not what I wanted ;)

Any ideas?


Here is my (simple) config:

Service
        BackEnd
                Address         192.168.12.20
                Timeout         300
                Port            80
                Priority        6
        End

        BackEnd
                Address         192.168.12.21
                Timeout         300
                Port            80
                Priority        3
        End

        BackEnd
                Address         192.168.12.22
                Timeout         300
                Port            80
                Priority        6
        End

        BackEnd
                Address         192.168.12.23
                Timeout         300
                Port            80
                Priority        6
        End

        Session
        Type    PARM
                ID      "sid"
                TTL     300
        End

End


Thanks and regards,
Robert

Re: [Pound Mailing List] Pound ignores one backend
Steve <spm(at)fostam.franken.de>
2007-03-01 19:16:59 [ FULL ]
Robert Klikics wrote:
[...]

This sounds very much as if dynamic rescaling was the culprit. Try
compiling pound with "--disable-dynscale" and there is a good chance the
problem will be gone.

Steve

Re: [Pound Mailing List] Pound ignores one backend
Robert Klikics <robert.klikics(at)unitedprint.com>
2007-03-01 20:08:41 [ FULL ]
Steve schrieb:[...]
Thanks for the info. But in which case makes the "dynamic rescaling" 
sense? For me it does not make sense ...[...]
Robert

MailBoxer