[JBoss JIRA] (MODCLUSTER-318) make connector address user configurable
by James Livingston (JIRA)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/MODCLUSTER-318?page=com.atlassian.jira.pl... ]
James Livingston commented on MODCLUSTER-318:
---------------------------------------------
This would also be useful to handle the case when there is a NAT between httpd and the backend, in which case the connector binding address is not the address that httpd can reach it on. That has been brought up a few times in the forum such as https://developer.jboss.org/thread/249888
> make connector address user configurable
> ----------------------------------------
>
> Key: MODCLUSTER-318
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/MODCLUSTER-318
> Project: mod_cluster
> Issue Type: Feature Request
> Affects Versions: 1.2.1.Final
> Reporter: Aleksandar Kostadinov
> Assignee: Paul Ferraro
>
> MODCLUSTER-168 introduced a change that broke some existing working configurations relying on using IP instead of a hostname. Also it is likely to be the cause of MODCLUSTER-91.
> To have everybody happy, this needs to be made configurable, perhaps a system property that user can set to force a particular IP or hostname. It would also be very useful if there is a special value that makes the behavior same as before the changes in MODCLUSTER-168. For example setting the value to -1 would return the original behavior.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.11#64026)
8 years, 12 months
[JBoss JIRA] (MODCLUSTER-472) wildfly-mod_cluster integration should load-balance requests on more than one ports
by Radoslav Husar (JIRA)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/MODCLUSTER-472?page=com.atlassian.jira.pl... ]
Radoslav Husar reassigned MODCLUSTER-472:
-----------------------------------------
Assignee: Radoslav Husar (was: Jean-Frederic Clere)
> wildfly-mod_cluster integration should load-balance requests on more than one ports
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: MODCLUSTER-472
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/MODCLUSTER-472
> Project: mod_cluster
> Issue Type: Feature Request
> Components: Core & Container Integration (Java)
> Affects Versions: 1.3.0.Final
> Environment: httpd 2.2
> modcluster 1.3.0
> wildfly 8.2.0.Final
> Reporter: kostd kostd
> Assignee: Radoslav Husar
> Priority: Trivial
> Labels: connector, listener, load-balancing, mod_cluster, port, undertow, wildfly
> Attachments: load-balancer-question-scheme.png
>
>
> Earlier I asked on forums https://developer.jboss.org/message/946476#946476
> {quote}
> on our wf8.2 server the web-app have two http endpoints: on port 8080 to regular http requests; and on port 37304 to "special" user requests in protected area.
>
> we want use mod_cluster as load-balancer that balances user requests on both ports. For example(see the pic), lets requests on balancer`s port 7801 will be balance between node1 and node2 on port 8080, and requests on balancer`s port 7802 will be balance on port 37304.
>
> In modcluster-subsystem configuration in standalone.xml we can set only one connector for mod-cluster config. And cannot set more than one mod-cluster-config section:
>
> {code:title=jboss-as-mod-cluster_1_2.xsd}
> <xs:element name="mod-cluster-config" type="mod-cluster-configType" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="1"/>
> {code}
>
> alternatively, we can use mod_cluster + mod_proxy_balancer or mod_cluster + mod_jk so that mod_cluster balances on 8080 and other tech(mod_proxy_balancer or mod_jk) balances on other port 37304.
> But this decision obviously not good: reverse loopback from servers(mgmt info with loadfactor of server) to balancer will manage balancing only for one port, not for both.
>
> Seems that mod_cluster absolutely not supports more than one connector balancing:
>
> {code:title=http://docs.jboss.org/mod_cluster/1.3.0/pdf/Mod_cluster-UserGuide.pdf}
> Like mod_jk and mod_proxy_balancer, mod_cluster requires a connector in your server.xml to
> which to forward web requests. Unlike mod_jk and mod_proxy_balancer, mod_cluster is not
> confined to AJP, but can use HTTP as well. While AJP is generally faster, an HTTP connector
> can optionally be secured via SSL. If multiple possible connectors are defined in your server.xml,
> mod_cluster uses the following algorithm to choose between them:
> 1. If an native (APR) AJP connector is available, use it.
> 2. If an AJP connector is available, use it.
> 3. Otherwise, choose the HTTP connector with the highest max threads.
> {code}
>
> is this true?
>
> what is the best way to solve our problem?
> {quote}
> During more than 100 views no one answer :'(
> Now we have made a decision to use mod_proxy_balancer, but if it possible to refine mod_cluster subsystem, this will be greate. When it happens, we will jump to mod_cluster again :)
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.11#64026)
9 years
[JBoss JIRA] (MODCLUSTER-472) wildfly-mod_cluster integration should load-balance requests on more than one ports
by kostd kostd (JIRA)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/MODCLUSTER-472?page=com.atlassian.jira.pl... ]
kostd kostd updated MODCLUSTER-472:
-----------------------------------
Priority: Trivial (was: Minor)
> wildfly-mod_cluster integration should load-balance requests on more than one ports
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: MODCLUSTER-472
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/MODCLUSTER-472
> Project: mod_cluster
> Issue Type: Feature Request
> Components: Core & Container Integration (Java)
> Affects Versions: 1.3.0.Final
> Environment: httpd 2.2
> modcluster 1.3.0
> wildfly 8.2.0.Final
> Reporter: kostd kostd
> Assignee: Jean-Frederic Clere
> Priority: Trivial
> Labels: connector, listener, load-balancing, mod_cluster, port, undertow, wildfly
> Attachments: load-balancer-question-scheme.png
>
>
> Earlier I asked on forums https://developer.jboss.org/message/946476#946476
> {quote}
> on our wf8.2 server the web-app have two http endpoints: on port 8080 to regular http requests; and on port 37304 to "special" user requests in protected area.
>
> we want use mod_cluster as load-balancer that balances user requests on both ports. For example(see the pic), lets requests on balancer`s port 7801 will be balance between node1 and node2 on port 8080, and requests on balancer`s port 7802 will be balance on port 37304.
>
> In modcluster-subsystem configuration in standalone.xml we can set only one connector for mod-cluster config. And cannot set more than one mod-cluster-config section:
>
> {code:title=jboss-as-mod-cluster_1_2.xsd}
> <xs:element name="mod-cluster-config" type="mod-cluster-configType" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="1"/>
> {code}
>
> alternatively, we can use mod_cluster + mod_proxy_balancer or mod_cluster + mod_jk so that mod_cluster balances on 8080 and other tech(mod_proxy_balancer or mod_jk) balances on other port 37304.
> But this decision obviously not good: reverse loopback from servers(mgmt info with loadfactor of server) to balancer will manage balancing only for one port, not for both.
>
> Seems that mod_cluster absolutely not supports more than one connector balancing:
>
> {code:title=http://docs.jboss.org/mod_cluster/1.3.0/pdf/Mod_cluster-UserGuide.pdf}
> Like mod_jk and mod_proxy_balancer, mod_cluster requires a connector in your server.xml to
> which to forward web requests. Unlike mod_jk and mod_proxy_balancer, mod_cluster is not
> confined to AJP, but can use HTTP as well. While AJP is generally faster, an HTTP connector
> can optionally be secured via SSL. If multiple possible connectors are defined in your server.xml,
> mod_cluster uses the following algorithm to choose between them:
> 1. If an native (APR) AJP connector is available, use it.
> 2. If an AJP connector is available, use it.
> 3. Otherwise, choose the HTTP connector with the highest max threads.
> {code}
>
> is this true?
>
> what is the best way to solve our problem?
> {quote}
> During more than 100 views no one answer :'(
> Now we have made a decision to use mod_proxy_balancer, but if it possible to refine mod_cluster subsystem, this will be greate. When it happens, we will jump to mod_cluster again :)
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.11#64026)
9 years
[JBoss JIRA] (MODCLUSTER-460) Silence superflous "MODCLUSTER000033: Failed to interrupt socket reception" on shutdown
by Radoslav Husar (JIRA)
[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/MODCLUSTER-460?page=com.atlassian.jira.pl... ]
Radoslav Husar edited comment on MODCLUSTER-460 at 12/7/15 10:24 AM:
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Had to revert the original fix, the fix would be stop using old IO altogether.
was (Author: rhusar):
Had to revert the original fix, the fix would be stop using old IO.
> Silence superflous "MODCLUSTER000033: Failed to interrupt socket reception" on shutdown
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: MODCLUSTER-460
> URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/MODCLUSTER-460
> Project: mod_cluster
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Core & Container Integration (Java)
> Affects Versions: 1.3.1.Final
> Reporter: Radoslav Husar
> Assignee: Radoslav Husar
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 1.3.2.Alpha1
>
>
> This seems to be caused by the legacy code in mod_cluster, which could instead make use of interruptible channels introduced since JDK 1.4. Simpler option would be log this message onto debug.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.11#64026)
9 years