Hi Pawel,
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 01:04:42PM -0700, Pawel Veselov wrote:
> Wiilly, Lucas, thank you so much for analyzing my configs and your help.
>
> We did find out what was wrong.
>
> Some long time ago we added 'option nolinger' to the defaults section. This
> was figured by trial and error
Wiilly, Lucas, thank you so much for analyzing my configs and your help.
We did find out what was wrong.
Some long time ago we added 'option nolinger' to the defaults section. This
was figured by trial and error, and that option, on 1.4, served us well to
the point of us forgetting about it. When
Hi Pawel,
On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 02:47:41PM -0700, Pawel Veselov wrote:
> > This settings should theoretically make
> > haproxy behave exactly the same.
> >
>
> So think that somehow, 1.5 was creating or keeping a lot more open
> connections at a time, and depriving the kernel, or its own limits
> So think that somehow, 1.5 was creating or keeping a lot more open
> connections at a time, and depriving the kernel, or its own limits of
> available connections?
Not necessarly the kernel itself. Some stateful inspection firewall between
the proxy and the backend, this includes conntrack on
Hi Lukas,
On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 2:06 PM, Lukas Tribus wrote:
> Hi Pawel,
> > Hi.
> >
> > We've tried migrating haproxy from 1.4.22 to 1.5.2. As a result we
> > experienced a serious performance impact. The only thing that was
> > changed was hapxory version. We tried 1.5.12 afterwards, but tha
Hi Pawel,
> Hi.
>
> We've tried migrating haproxy from 1.4.22 to 1.5.2. As a result we
> experienced a serious performance impact. The only thing that was
> changed was hapxory version. We tried 1.5.12 afterwards, but that
> didn't really help. This is running on AWS Amazon Linux 64bit. 1.5.2
> w
6 matches
Mail list logo
