Re: [Sqlgrey-users] Load balancing question, part 2

[Gary S. <gar...@ho...>]

> SQLgrey is doing the correct thing in this case. It does not know why
> the connection is gone or even if it is gone for a while. The load balancer
> should close the connection to the remote SQLgrey when the frontends go
> away or depending on how it works, when all connections from the frontend
> are closed. This will keep SQLgrey from holding old connections around until
> they are reclaimed. It is useful to have timeouts such as you mention to
> handle
> other bits of poorly designed software.
> 

I will probably implement some level of optional timeouts in the codebase that I have, and I will provide it as a patch for those who might be interested.  I think adding it as an optional config variable has merits, default it to 0, which would just bypass the timeout for normal operation.  For the most part, postfix->sqlgrey has always worked flawlessly (for the most part) and it's this load balancing that is disrupting the normal flow.  

I will also try some of the options on the load balancer, but if persistent connections didn't resolve it, then its doubtful that other options will.

If we are seeing this issue on test (~500msg/day) this on production it might fail entirely (~250msg/minute).  That's where my concern really is.