Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Port number allocation differs from Foreman #13

Closed
mgax opened this issue Oct 30, 2012 · 2 comments
Closed

Port number allocation differs from Foreman #13

mgax opened this issue Oct 30, 2012 · 2 comments

Comments

@mgax
Copy link
Contributor

mgax commented Oct 30, 2012

Foreman ports:

web.1    | 5000
worker.1 | 5100
redis.1  | 5200
es.1     | 5300

Honcho ports:

web.1    | 5000
redis.1  | 6001
worker.1 | 7002
es.1     | 8003

So there are three bugs to fix:

  1. Each process type should get only 100 ports, not 1000.
  2. The counter for allocating next port should be process-type-specific instead of global.
  3. Processes should be allocated port ranges in the order they appear in the Procfile.

This bug matters because, without stable port numbers, it's hard to configure process types to talk to each other.

@nickstenning
Copy link
Owner

Thank you for spotting this! Hopefully this is fixed now.

@mgax
Copy link
Contributor Author

mgax commented Oct 31, 2012

Works beautifully, thanks!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants