haproxytech
Named backend server instead of generic SRV_x name
Hello. I'm interesting, is it possible to define custom backend downstream server names instead of generic naming SRV_x? For example it could be the pod name or another custom value passed by annotation.
This is critical in some kind of scenarios like rolling update with putting backend server for maint. Now in UI it's not possible to understand which backend will go to maint.
I don't think this is possible today: https://github.com/haproxy/haproxy/issues/952
@fabianonunes i'm not talking about renaming in runtime. i'm talking about correct naming before populatin backend configuration. Btw may be there is another way to diffrentiate backend servers during runtime. Via labels or something like that?
Hi @pawellrus , servers names are statically generated by the controller. No tweak possible.
@ivanmatmati so it's impossible to put selected pod to maintenance before dis-labeling them to make sure that users' sessions won't broke forcefully?
This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.
![stale[bot] avatar](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1724?v=4 "Published by a pub.dev verified publisher"){kind=small}
wouldn't it be possible to use "add server backend-name/podname ip:port" for new entries and "del server backend-name/podname" when removing ?
@pawellrus , the servers list the ip address of the pod so you can always find the original pod.
This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.
This change would also improve metrics. Right now there are dozens of SRV_x servers reported in the metrics which is difficult to follow. (that also relates to https://github.com/haproxytech/kubernetes-ingress/issues/670)
This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.
@mike-code the ones that are marked for maint are the ones that are marked from kubernetes to be soon removed.
@hoerup about
wouldn't it be possible to use "add server backend-name/podname ip:port" for new entries and "del server backend-name/podname" when removing ?
this is in roadmap, its a bit more complicated that would would think initially, but we do have that in plans
