[PATCH] add documentation about backend naming for VMOD authors

Dridi Boukelmoune dridi at varni.sh
Mon Nov 2 11:42:48 CET 2015

>> In the "Writing a director" documentation I *recommend* directors
>> writers to back their director with a *VMOD object* because VMOD
>> object come with a *unique* vcl_name and don't outlive the VCL's
>> lifespan. It makes VMOD objects in my opinion the best facility to
>> write a director.
> Certainly, that's a good solution -- as long as your use case allows
> for it. You could even have an object generate multiple backends,
> using the object's name for a "safe namespace", within which it
> creates unique names (say by adding the ".%d" suffix).
> And you've made it clear that you're fully aware that using objects is
> not the only, necessary solution -- and even then, the VMOD has to go
> through the motions of using the object's vcl_name for backend names.

I apparently I haven't made it clear that I fully understand how VMOD
objects and backends are totally unrelated, except for the vcl_name on
which they can't collide.

> However the VMOD goes about it, uniqueness of naming with all of the
> consequences is something it has to take care of (or not, and take the
> consequences).
> Adding something to the Varnish/VRT interface to make it work right
> will go a long way to making this painless.
> D'accord?

I don't think it's a good idea to leave the end-user with unnamed
backends in the VSL that don't even appear in the CLI and VSM, or
confusing names in the CLI/VSM because of name collisions auto-repair.

I care way way more about the end-user's convenience rather than the
VMOD writer's. Especially since the rules to follow to ensure
uniqueness wouldn't even be hard, there isn't that much pain in my


More information about the varnish-dev mailing list