Revert to predictable upstream names, optional SHA1 names #1736
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
I am fine with the content of this PR, but I'm not sure the word "predictable" in the documentation is correct. IMO the sha1 hash of a domain name is perfectly predictable - maybe |
|
@tkw1536 I think I'll go with |
3226488 to
a33af34
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I decided to backpedal and revert both #1163 and #1725 so that people that relied on predictable
upstreamblocks names won't have their setup break on them.As an alternative fix to #1162, I added an optional
SHA1_UPSTREAM_NAMEenvironment variable to nginx-proxy which, when set totrue, will forces theupstreamblock's names to SHA1 hashes of the hostnames in the same manner as #1725 did.@cheald I believe this PR will solve your original issues without breaking stuff for others like the previous solution did.
@akpircher, @tkw1536, @acortelyou, @EricSoroos sorry for the back and forth on this one.