This replaces `if (i.len > e) i.len = e;` by `isttrim(i, e)`.
---
dev/coccinelle/ist.cocci | 8
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
diff --git a/dev/coccinelle/ist.cocci b/dev/coccinelle/ist.cocci
index 5b6aa6b2c..7e9a6ac05 100644
--- a/dev/coccinelle/ist.cocci
+++ b/dev/coccinelle/ist.cocci
This replaces `chunk_memcat()` with `chunk_istcat()` if the parameters are the
ist's `.ptr` and `.len`.
---
dev/coccinelle/ist.cocci | 8
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
diff --git a/dev/coccinelle/ist.cocci b/dev/coccinelle/ist.cocci
index 7e9a6ac05..4945141b2 100644
--- a/dev/coccinell
Make use of the new rules to use `isttrim()`.
---
src/cache.c | 3 +--
src/flt_trace.c | 3 +--
src/hlua.c | 6 ++
src/http_ana.c | 3 +--
src/log.c | 6 ++
5 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/cache.c b/src/cache.c
index ba2b63c49..e871a7b30
This replaces `chunk_strncat()` with `chunk_istcat()` if the parameters are the
ist's `.ptr` and `.len`.
---
dev/coccinelle/ist.cocci | 8
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
diff --git a/dev/coccinelle/ist.cocci b/dev/coccinelle/ist.cocci
index 4945141b2..680afbade 100644
--- a/dev/coccinel
Hi Willy,
find my (probably :-) ) final CLEANUP series for 2.5.
Regarding the final patch:
'chunk_strncat()' appears to be completely redundant, it simply passes through
the arguments and even takes an int instead of a size_t. Should it be removed?
Best regards
Tim Düsterhus
Tim Duesterhus (6)
Delegate chunk_istcat, chunk_cat and chunk_strncat to the most generic
chunk_memcat.
---
include/haproxy/chunk.h | 41 +
1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/haproxy/chunk.h b/include/haproxy/chunk.h
index af9ef816b..05fd16
This is to make use of `chunk_istcat()`.
---
src/cache.c | 2 +-
src/http_fetch.c | 2 +-
src/http_htx.c | 4 ++--
src/mux_fcgi.c | 10 +-
src/tcpcheck.c | 4 ++--
5 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/cache.c b/src/cache.c
index e871a7b30..ee4
Hi Tim,
On Mon, Nov 08, 2021 at 09:04:59AM +0100, Tim Duesterhus wrote:
> Hi Willy,
>
> find my (probably :-) ) final CLEANUP series for 2.5.
>
> Regarding the final patch:
>
> 'chunk_strncat()' appears to be completely redundant, it simply passes through
> the arguments and even takes an int i
On Mon, Nov 08, 2021 at 11:41:52AM +0100, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> Hi Tim,
>
> On Mon, Nov 08, 2021 at 09:04:59AM +0100, Tim Duesterhus wrote:
> > Hi Willy,
> >
> > find my (probably :-) ) final CLEANUP series for 2.5.
> >
> > Regarding the final patch:
> >
> > 'chunk_strncat()' appears to be com
Hi.
I have 2 LB's which should limit the connection to one backend.
I would try to use "conn_cur" in a stick table and share it via peers.
Have anyone such a solution already in place?
That's my assuption for the config.
```
peers be_pixel_peers
bind 9123
log global
localpeer {{ ansibl
Willy,
On 11/8/21 11:43 AM, Willy Tarreau wrote:
You're totally right. Not only it is redundant, but it is wrong (which
is why it is redundant). By being called strncat() one would hope that
it never copies more than the source, but here it ignores the source's
size and always takes the len argu
On Mon, Nov 08, 2021 at 12:53:00PM +0100, Tim Düsterhus wrote:
> Willy,
>
> On 11/8/21 11:43 AM, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> > > You're totally right. Not only it is redundant, but it is wrong (which
> > > is why it is redundant). By being called strncat() one would hope that
> > > it never copies more
On Sat, Nov 06, 2021 at 12:30:43PM +0100, William Dauchy wrote:
> `info_field_names` and `stat_field_names` no longer exist and have been
> moved in stats.c
> To avoid changing this comment, just mention the name of the new table
> `info_fields` and `stat_fields`
Merged, thanks William.
Willy
Hi William,
On Sun, Nov 07, 2021 at 10:18:47AM +0100, William Dauchy wrote:
> - add new metric: `haproxy_backend_agg_server_check_status`
> it counts the number of servers matching a specific check status
> this permits to exclude per server check status as the usage is often
> to rely on th
Great to hear - thanks !
On Sat, Nov 6, 2021 at 12:58 AM Vincent Bernat wrote:
> ❦ 5 November 2021 17:05 -06, Jim Freeman:
>
> > Might this (or something 2.4-ish) be heading towards bullseye-backports ?
> > https://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=haproxy
> > https://packages.debian.org/bul
On Mon, Nov 8, 2021 at 1:52 PM Willy Tarreau wrote:
> Just to be sure, is this something you want to merge into 2.5 or is it
> to be queued next ? I'm fine with both, but I prefer to ask as it's not
> just a one-liner and I don't know the impact on promex.
I know Christopher was possibly thinking
On Mon, Nov 08, 2021 at 02:31:32PM +0100, William Dauchy wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 8, 2021 at 1:52 PM Willy Tarreau wrote:
> > Just to be sure, is this something you want to merge into 2.5 or is it
> > to be queued next ? I'm fine with both, but I prefer to ask as it's not
> > just a one-liner and I do
17 matches
Mail list logo