detailed data with many fields for businesses, healthcare and more

Healthcare List Package: $295 for all 21 complete lists below - Also available, Business Lists, Foregin Business Lists and Consumer data Physicians (34 specialties) Database:788k records, 17k emails, 200k fax numbers Chiropractors Database:108,421 total records

constructing redirects, trying to keep https connections

I've been looking through the documentation and looking for information online, but can't find anything. Currently I have this in a backend: reqirep ^([^\ ]*)\ /omc/(.*)\ (.*) \1\ /foo/bar.do?prefix=/appnb&page=/baz.do&action=acctno&id=\2\ \3 What I would like to do now is do something very

Re: Bench of haproxy

Hi Vincent, On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 04:54:06PM +0200, Vincent Bernat wrote: > Hi! > > I have tried to bench HAProxy 1.4.15 using two Spirent Avalanche. The > HAProxy box has the following features: > - HP Proliant DL380 G5 > - 2 Xeon E5405 @ 2.00GHz > - 4 cores per CPU > - 4 GB RAM > - 2.6.

request rate limiting + whitelist Google

Hello guys, Am wondering if once can rate-limit (reqs/second or /minute) globally, but also whitelist Google (and other crawlers), by hardcoding their reverse dns hosts in the config? If reverse dns/host check is no-go, can the same be achieved using user agent filter? Any ideas are greatly

Re: Linux routing performace

James, Maybe you could explain your network structure a little better to us. What networks do you reach on your internal network, is it a limited set? I assume that you need to reach all internet addresses on the public interface? So far nothing in your description suggests that you couldn't ad

Re: Linux routing performace

On Thu, May 05, 2011 at 10:22:55AM -0400, James Bardin wrote: > On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 7:02 AM, Willy Tarreau wrote: > > > > > I have no idea with ip rules impact performance that much for you. > > Anyway, since you're dealing with two interfaces, you can explicitly > > bind haproxy to each of th

Re: Linux routing performace

On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 7:02 AM, Willy Tarreau wrote: > > I have no idea with ip rules impact performance that much for you. > Anyway, since you're dealing with two interfaces, you can explicitly > bind haproxy to each of them and still have a default route on each > interface. The trick is to use

Re: Linux routing performace

Hi James, On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 09:32:04AM -0400, James Bardin wrote: > This isn't the end of the world if it's unsolvable, as I can request > that all load-balancing service IPs be public for now, and spin up > another haproxy pair for private services if there is a specific > requirement. > >