|
Opps wrong patch :(
This one should be applied after Andy's patch and the one I have sent
before... Sorry! I forgot to apply the Andy's one before generating in
the patch i have sent. Use this one please!
On Tue, 2007-10-30 at 17:48 +0200, Rumen Bogdanovski wrote:
> Hi Simon,
>
> > >
> > > Also I find it a good idea to sync the connections on ESTABLISHED to
> > > FIN_WAIT transition, this will reduce the hanging time to 2 minutes and
> > > we will avoid the short timeout if the conn is established.
> >
> > I'm not oposed to this idea, but the synchronisation messages are
> > sent via UDP, and thus an individual message may not arrive
> > (though hopefully the majority of them will). I guess that
> > your scheeme will work anyway: In the case where the packet arrives
> > the state is updated; In the case where it doesn't then we
> > are just back to where we are now, but that shouldn't happen
> > very often (hopefully).
> >
>
> I am sending you a patch that will make Andy's patch to work better. It
> makes the master to sync connections on ANY->IP_VS_TCP_S_FIN_WAIT and
> ANY->IP_VS_TCP_S_CLOSE state transition, in this case normally the
> connection on the backup will be closed more or less at the same time as
> on the master. If we are not lucky it will timeout with
> IP_VS_TCP_S_FIN_WAIT timeout (2min), and if the backup misses even this
> sync, bad luck, 15 minutes till the timeout...
>
> I have also made the backup to set the state of any received connection
> in order to make "ipvsadm -lnc" display its proper state and for Andy's
> patch to set the proper timeout. This does not look to be a problem I
> have spent more than half a day testing all this, and it looks working.
>
> This patch should be applied over the patch I have sent before.
>
> Tell me what do you think? Do you agree with my view to treat the
> timeout problem on the backup?
>
> regards,
> Rumen
|
