-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 708
LoadBalancer: add an ability to supply custom load-balancer strategy into context #730
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
Comments
Our current discussion is in #672 |
as far as I understand from that thread it is more about how to choose implementation based on the request, while my proposal was about how to choose the load-balancer algorithm during context creation. |
Also related to: #660. |
Reopening, so we can include it in team discussion. |
Since the same result can be obtained by adding the default configuration, we don't think there's a need for a different solution for the same use-case. |
If you would like us to look at this issue, please provide the requested information. If the information is not provided within the next 7 days this issue will be closed. |
Ok, thanks for info, closing this issue ticket than |
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
It can be useful in a few cases:
In this case, would be great to have an ability to supply custom login via bean in context and allow to enable it for the specific client via configuration properties.
For example in SCG the I have a lot of routes and want to supply a custom load-balanced algorithm (let it be sticky in this case) and keep default round-robin for others.
As a can see for not I have to add
And Implement custom configuration with factory methods.
Describe the solution you'd like
It would be cool to have smth like:
and place it in
LoadBalancerClientConfiguration
It will allow using properties to define a load-balanced strategy and supply an additional one via the context.
Of course, the implementation should be a little bit different to address backward-compatibility but I think the one supplied here is enough to illustrate intention.
Describe alternatives you've considered
There are definitely a lot of other ways to implement a "factory".
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: