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
F5-router, "Idling applications" feature does not work #4068
Conversation
@knobunc PTAL |
admin_guide/idling_applications.adoc
Outdated
@@ -16,6 +16,12 @@ toc::[] | |||
As an {product-title} administrator, you can idle applications in order to | |||
reduce the consumption of resources. | |||
|
|||
[NOTE] | |||
==== | |||
This works when using the default HAProxy router. You will need to configure |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Erm... you can't configure the F5 to do this. It requires a code change, and we need to work out how to make it do it (or make it use the service IP... but it doesn't have access to the service network, so it's ugly).
How about "Automatic unidling by a router is currently only supported by the default HAProxy router"
But it really does belong at the bottom since that's the bit that mentions routes.
Should we add a caveat to the F5 section too? So that people are informed when they pick the F5?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
OK
@knobunc Anything else? PTAL |
Made a NOTE that unidling is HAProxy only bug 143165 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1431658
@knobunc PTAL |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
Should we also drop a note over in the F5 router information so that you are informed when setting up F5?
@knobunc You still have Changes requested set... |
@knobunc Is this ready to merge? |
@ahardin-rh Are you the docs person that will handle this? |
@pecameron yes, it is ready to merge. But should we also add a note in the F5 section of the docs noting this limitation? |
LGTM! |
[rev_history] |
OSE 3.5, 3.4, and 3.3
Made a NOTE that this is HAProxy only
(moved last to lines of file into note)
bug 143165
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1431658