On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 4:56 AM, Prashanth Ganesh
wrote:
> Hi
>
> I have a scenario where i have two tomcat servers A and B behind the
> haproxy, now one of the app servers have a new version of the war and the
> other tomcat has a old version of the war file.So at a point of time we will
> have o
Hi Willy,
Le 09/09/2014 08:08, Willy Tarreau a écrit :
Hi Cyril,
On Sun, Sep 07, 2014 at 06:30:40PM +0200, Cyril Bonté wrote:
I was optimistic during my tests unless I tried sending POST requests
with a body longer than the buffer size. In certain conditions, haproxy
segfaults. For example, th
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 04:35:40PM +, Matt Robenolt wrote:
> Hmm, so right now this is a bit confusing. The wrapper doesn't pass
> along signals to the the actual haproxy process afaict, so I'm not
> sure that'd be an issue. If you needed to SIGHUP haproxy itself, you'd
> read the pid and whatn
Update Contact Details
Hello!
You can update your profile by clicking the below link.
Update your profile
If the above
Hmm, so right now this is a bit confusing. The wrapper doesn't pass
along signals to the the actual haproxy process afaict, so I'm not
sure that'd be an issue. If you needed to SIGHUP haproxy itself, you'd
read the pid and whatnot and handle that.
I look at this behavior as exactly what the init.d
Hi,
I want to take the status of a server of a given backend and use it in
another backend or in the frontend.
If that possible?
I though there might be something simular to
"nbsrv()" - but I haven't found anything.
Best Regards
Rainer
Encore plus de nouveautes sur
Led-produits.com
Led-produits.com est une boutique en ligne specialisee dans la vente
d'ampoule LED, de lampe LED et bien d'autres produits d'eclairage LED de
qualite.
Nous avons selectionne pour vous une gamme complete de produits LED pour
> Hi,
>
> Le 10/09/2014 15:54, e...@cslab.ece.ntua.gr a ?crit :
>>> You can use the log-format directive below, in your frontend, to log
>>> SSL
>> related informations:
>>> log-format %ci:%cp\ [%t]\ %ft\ %b/%s\ %Tq/%Tw/%Tc/%Tr/%Tt\ %ST\ %B\
>>> %CC\ %CS\ %tsc\ %ac/%fc/%bc/%sc/%rc\ %sq/%bq\ %hr\
On 9/10/2014 11:43 PM, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> It is also possible that they have stored locally a copy of your old cert
> or maybe they have your CA's certs and you changed to a new CA to sign this
> new cert.
It's the same CA and intermediate cert. We suspect that they have
configured it to only
Hi Franky,
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 01:08:09PM +0200, Franky Van Liedekerke wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 11:40 AM, Franky Van Liedekerke
> wrote:
> > After doing tcpdump on both servers (no ldap errors anywhere in the
> > ldap logs), I see that the ldap server sends out resets and the
> > clie
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 11:40 AM, Franky Van Liedekerke
wrote:
> After doing tcpdump on both servers (no ldap errors anywhere in the
> ldap logs), I see that the ldap server sends out resets and the
> clients connecting to haproxy. This might be related to one another.
> Each client seems to send
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 11:40 AM, Franky Van Liedekerke
wrote:
> After doing tcpdump on both servers (no ldap errors anywhere in the
> ldap logs), I see that the ldap server sends out resets and the
> clients connecting to haproxy. This might be related to one another.
> Each client seems to send
After doing tcpdump on both servers (no ldap errors anywhere in the
ldap logs), I see that the ldap server sends out resets and the
clients connecting to haproxy. This might be related to one another.
Each client seems to send 2 RST packets at the end of a LDAP TLS
session (over port 389), does tha
Hi Marc-Antoine,
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 11:10:10AM +0200, Marc-Antoine Perennou wrote:
> On 11 September 2014 07:44, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 10:38:55PM -0700, Matt Robenolt wrote:
> >> Awesome, thanks. :)
> >>
> >> Is it possible to also get this applied into the 1.5 bra
On 11 September 2014 07:44, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 10:38:55PM -0700, Matt Robenolt wrote:
>> Awesome, thanks. :)
>>
>> Is it possible to also get this applied into the 1.5 branch since this is
>> low risk and doesn???t break any backwards compatibility and whatnot?
>
> I'v
15 matches
Mail list logo