Forum Discussion
Have a member dedicated for softlaunch/test
Hi there!
We have a situation where the developers wants to have a pool member that's used only for testing purposes and only:
- From our external office IP.
- When it's up.
Here's a simplified version of the irule right now:
set [HTTP::host] host
switch $host {
"subomain1.domain.com" { pool subomain1.domain.com-5601_pool }
"subomain2.domain.com" { pool subomain2.domain.com-5602_pool }
"subomain3.domain.com" { pool subomain3.domain.com-5603_pool }
default { pool www.domain.com-5600_pool }
}
Suggestion 1:
A thought would be to add priority groups and set ie. 100 for the production servers and 0 for the test server. This would make me have to expand the pool selection irule:
if { [LB::status node 10.0.0.1] eq "up" && [IP::remote_addr] eq $office } {
set testnode 1
} else {
set testnode 0
}
set [HTTP::host] host
switch $host {
"subomain1.domain.com" { if{ $testnode } { pool subomain1.domain.com-5601_pool member 10.0.0.1 } else { pool subomain1.domain.com-5601_pool } }
"subomain2.domain.com" { if{ $testnode } { pool subomain2.domain.com-5601_pool member 10.0.0.1 } else { pool subomain2.domain.com-5601_pool } }
"subomain3.domain.com" { if{ $testnode } { pool subomain3.domain.com-5601_pool member 10.0.0.1 } else { pool subomain3.domain.com-5601_pool } }
default { if{ $testnode } { pool subomain1.domain.com-5601_pool member 10.0.0.1 } else { pool subomain1.domain.com-5601_pool } }
}
Suggestion 2:
Add http bindings on the sites for port 80 and the host header of domain.
set [HTTP::host] host
if { [LB::status node 10.0.0.1] eq "up" && [IP::remote_addr] eq $office } {
pool testpool.domain.com
} else {
switch $host {
"subomain1.domain.com" { pool subomain1.domain.com-5601_pool }
"subomain2.domain.com" { pool subomain2.domain.com-5602_pool }
"subomain3.domain.com" { pool subomain3.domain.com-5603_pool }
default { pool www.domain.com-5600_pool }
}
This is still in the design phase and I already feel nausea when looking at option 1 and option 2 seems like a viable alternative but I can't get it out of my head that there has to be a better way. I'm a big fan of standardization and clean rules and try to avoid quick and dirty fixes in general.
Surely this must not be the first time someone got a request like this? Grateful for any suggestions or input!
Kind regards,
Patrik
3 Replies
What_Lies_Bene1Cirrostratus
Can you not just build a new Virtual Server with the server as the single member in the Pool assigned to it?
- Kevin_Stewart
Employee
Just for clarification, do you mean a pool or a pool member? A separate pool, or separate VIP as Steve says, would be easier.
when CLIENT_ACCEPTED { collect the default configured pool for the VIP set default_pool [LB::server pool] } when HTTP_REQUEST { switch [string tolower [HTTP::host]] { "localtest.domain.com" { if request to test server, and is local IP, and test pool is up if { ( [IP::addr [IP::client_addr] equals "x.x.x.x/x"] ) and ( [active_members localtest_pool] > 1 ) } { pool localtest_pool } else { otherwise send to regular pool pool $default_pool } } default { send all regular traffic to assigned pool pool $default_pool } } }The above would trigger the IP and active_members evaluation if the request was for the "localtest.domain.com" host, assuming multiple host names resolved to the same VIP address. All other traffic would be routed to the VIP-assigned pool.
We went with suggestion 2 as it would mean the least change to our environment and iRules.
