Active-Passive stickiness not working as blogged

@Reiner030 wrote:

like here written:
http://www.haproxy.com/blog/emulating-activepassing-application-clustering-with-haproxy/

Tested an all versions of last ~ 6 months from debian Backport... actual this is

 # haproxy -v
 HA-Proxy version 1.7.5-2~bpo8+1 2017/05/27

My setup:

haproxy are each on same servers/different port as gearmand as frontend:

peers LB
        peer    gearman-jobserver-euc1-01               172.31.18.242:8999
        peer    gearman-jobserver-euc1-02               172.31.7.104:8999

backend BE_gearman-jobserver_staging
        mode                    tcp
        fullconn                10000
        email-alert             mailers sendmail
        email-alert             level   alert
        email-alert             from    haproxy@gearman-jobserver-euc1-01.xxx
        email-alert             to      sysops@xxx
        timeout                 client 60s
        timeout                 client-fin 60s
        timeout                 server 60s
        timeout                 tunnel 1h
        option                  tcp-check
        stick-table             type integer size 1 nopurge peers LB
        tcp-check               send STATUS\r\n
        tcp-check               expect string . comment Minimum\ empty\ response.
        stick on                dst_port
        server                  gearman-jobserver-euc1-01               172.31.18.242:40025 check inter 2s fastinter 1s downinter 20s fall 3 rise 2
        server                  gearman-jobserver-euc1-02               172.31.7.104:40025 check inter 2s fastinter 1s downinter 20s fall 3 rise 2 backup

and the default socket status is fine:

root@gearman-jobserver-euc1-01:~# echo "show table BE_gearman-jobserver_production" | socat unix:/run/haproxy/admin.sock -
# table: BE_gearman-jobserver_production, type: integer, size:1, used:1
0x5565daacc984: key=50005 use=0 exp=0 server_id=1

but the problem is that if server01 is down the stays on "server_id=1" and didn't switch as expected.to server_id=2.

Do I missed some requirements which weren't written in blog / I cannot find in documentation or is this a bug ?

Thanks and Bests

Reiner

Posts: 1

Participants: 1

Read full topic