Re: Lock contention in pat_match_str in threaded mode

Hi Brian, On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 04:19:58PM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: > At the moment I don't know what it requires to break it down per thread, > so I'll add a github issue referencing your report so that we don't forget. > Depending on the complexity, it may make sense to backport it once

Re: [PR/FEATURE] support for virtual hosts / Host header per server

On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 08:52:58AM +1100, Igor Cicimov wrote: > Sorry misread your issue. It is a strange setup you got there wonder why do > you need cross DC load balancing on the k8s ingress when you are already > doing it globally via DNS? Agreed, for me the setup is completely shifted by one

Get Best Position forhaproxy.com

Hi haproxy.com Digital marketing is more important now than ever before. These days lack of organic keyword data and traffic are common issues. Your business need to have a concrete SEO strategy in place if you want to succeed in online marketing. *We can deliver you the exact solution you are

Re: [PR/FEATURE] support for virtual hosts / Host header per server

On Wed, Oct 23, 2019, 8:36 AM Igor Cicimov wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 22, 2019, 10:27 PM Morotti, Romain D < > romain.d.moro...@jpmorgan.com> wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> >> >> The use case is to load balance applications in multiple datacenters or >> regions. >> >> The common pattern today to cover

Re: [PR/FEATURE] support for virtual hosts / Host header per server

On Tue, Oct 22, 2019, 10:27 PM Morotti, Romain D < romain.d.moro...@jpmorgan.com> wrote: > Hello, > > > > The use case is to load balance applications in multiple datacenters or > regions. > > The common pattern today to cover multiple locations is to deploy services > in each location separately

Re: [PATCH] MINOR: init: always fail when setrlimit fails

Hello Willy, On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 04:46:43PM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: > To be honest, I'm quite embarrassed by such a change. I think the main > reason for the initial warning instead of error was that most people > using haproxy in unprivileged environments never knew what to use as > a

Re: [PATCH] MINOR: init: always fail when setrlimit fails

Hi William, On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 11:14:20AM +0200, William Dauchy wrote: > On a production environment with a given maxconn, the fd limit can be > successfully set at a given time. While raising maxconn, a new max fd > limit is calculated. If the setrlimit fails (e.g if sysctl fs.nr_open > is

Re: [PR] updating req.body_param doc with chunk-encoding limitation

Hello, On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 10:23:05AM -0400, PR Bot wrote: > Patch title(s): >updating req.body_param doc with chunk-encoding limitation > > Link: >https://github.com/haproxy/haproxy/pull/333 diff --git a/doc/configuration.txt b/doc/configuration.txt index b79795c68..fc988b320

[PR] updating req.body_param doc with chunk-encoding limitation

Dear list! Author: fclerg <29798784+fcl...@users.noreply.github.com> Number of patches: 1 This is an automated relay of the Github pull request: updating req.body_param doc with chunk-encoding limitation Patch title(s): updating req.body_param doc with chunk-encoding limitation Link:

Re: Lock contention in pat_match_str in threaded mode

Hi Brian, On Mon, Oct 14, 2019 at 11:28:17PM +, Brian Diekelman wrote: > Just wanted to provide some information on what appears to be lock contention > around ACL lookups. > > We recently upgraded from haproxy-1.6 to haproxy-1.8.20 and switched from > 'nbprocs 8' to 'nbprocs 1, nbthreads

Re: HAProxy 1.8.21: One CPU core stuck at 100%

Hi Amin, On Mon, Oct 14, 2019 at 12:23:53AM +0330, Amin Shayan wrote: > Hello, > > I've several installations with different config and usage on 1.8.21 and no > problem so far. I found one installation on a cluster of 6 servers, which > all of them had one cpu core stuck at 100% and Idle_pct

Re: Contstats performances

Hello, On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 02:11:19PM +0200, Gaetan Deputier wrote: > Hello! > > I'm reaching out regarding the contstats option and "small performance > drop". What is exactly the performance drop described here? Induced > latency, CPU usage? > > >From what I've seen, it triggers a recount

Re: [PATCH] BUG/MINOR: dns: allow srv record weight set to 0

Le 22/10/2019 à 13:42, Baptiste a écrit : My comment is wrong. A server weight can have a value of 256. Please update the comment :) Ok, thanks. Merged now. -- Christopher Faulet

Re: [PATCH] BUG/MINOR: dns: allow srv record weight set to 0

Hi Luke, I remember I first did that intentionally to avoid values below 255 being "rounded" to 0... And I assumed people would remove servers from their DNS if they want a weight to 0. Now, with some feedback, I can see I was wrong. Next time, don't hesitate to ask the question on the ML, or on

Re: [PATCH] BUG/MINOR: dns: allow srv record weight set to 0

My comment is wrong. A server weight can have a value of 256. Please update the comment :) Baptiste On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 4:35 PM Christopher Faulet wrote: > Le 21/10/2019 à 16:20, Baptiste a écrit : > > Thx to 2 people who spotted a bug in my patch, (missing parenthesis). > > > > here is

RE: [PR/FEATURE] support for virtual hosts / Host header per server

Hello, The use case is to load balance applications in multiple datacenters or regions. The common pattern today to cover multiple locations is to deploy services in each location separately and independently. This happens with kubernetes for example, where a cluster is typically limited to a

Re: SSL Certificate Issue

Le 22/10/2019 à 08:55, Awais Azeem a écrit : I have seen your website it looks amazing but there is an only issue of SSL Certificate. Your website is not secure, a screenshot is also attached here. If you’re interested, let me know I'll help you. Happy to Help  Hi, It is not a SSL cert

SSL Certificate Issue

I have seen your website it looks amazing but there is an only issue of SSL Certificate. Your website is not secure, a screenshot is also attached here. If you’re interested, let me know I'll help you. Happy to Help  Thanks Best Regards Awais Azeem