Hi!
First, I'd like to thank Willy and the other haproxy contributors for
bringing this wonderful piece of software into the world :)
For the last 2 years now we have been running haproxy 1.3 successfully
to load balance our frontend applications and storage services. Mainly
the requests passing
Hi Erik,
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 11:08:08AM +0100, Erik Gulliksson wrote:
> Hi!
>
> First, I'd like to thank Willy and the other haproxy contributors for
> bringing this wonderful piece of software into the world :)
Thanks !
> For the last 2 years now we have been running haproxy 1.3 successful
Hi Willy,
Thanks for your elaborative answer.
> Did you observe anything special about the CPU usage ? Was it lower
> than with 1.3 ? If so, it would indicate some additional delay somewhere.
> If it was higher, it could indicate that the Transfer-encoding parser
> takes too many cycles but my pr
Hi Erik,
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 10:27:38AM +0100, Erik Gulliksson wrote:
> Hi Willy,
>
> Thanks for your elaborative answer.
>
> > Did you observe anything special about the CPU usage ? Was it lower
> > than with 1.3 ? If so, it would indicate some additional delay somewhere.
> > If it was high
Hi,
>> > Did you observe anything special about the CPU usage ? Was it lower
>> > than with 1.3 ? If so, it would indicate some additional delay somewhere.
>> > If it was higher, it could indicate that the Transfer-encoding parser
>> > takes too many cycles but my preliminary tests proved it to be
Hello,
>
> Unfortunately I the "show errors" returned empty, so I guess it
> was something else. The good news is that I gave haproxy 1.4.2 a
> try today and the 502/PR error with PUT/TE:chunked requests have
> now vanished. So thanks for solving this. I'm not sure which one of
> the bugs I was hit
Hi Erik,
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 02:29:46PM +0100, Erik Gulliksson wrote:
> Unfortunately I the "show errors" returned empty, so I guess it was
> something else. The good news is that I gave haproxy 1.4.2 a try today
> and the 502/PR error with PUT/TE:chunked requests have now vanished.
> So thank
Hi Malte,
>> So now when I got a working haproxy 1.4, I continued to try out
>> the "option http-server-close" but I hit a problem with our
>> stunnel (patched with stunnel-4.22-xforwarded-for.diff) instances.
>> It does not support keep-alive, so only the first HTTP request in
>> a keepalive-sess
> So now when I got a working haproxy 1.4, I continued to try out the
> "option http-server-close" but I hit a problem with our stunnel
> (patched with stunnel-4.22-xforwarded-for.diff) instances. It does not
> support keep-alive, so only the first HTTP request in a
> keepalive-session gets the X
Hi Willy
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 3:08 PM, Willy Tarreau wrote:
>
> OK so very likely it's the same problem I fixed yesterday using Bernhard's
> captures.
Great! Thanks to Bernhard as well then, for providing you with the captures.
> yes indeed it's expected. Stunnel is not designed to manipulat
I can second this comment and say that it works extremely well... nginx
operates very nicely as an SSL offloading device.
I am right now using nginx 0.8.33 (soon to bump up to 0.8.34) and
HAProxy 1.4.2 in production and things work very well for me.
-Nick
Maybe it's worth a try for you to
I can third this - nginx + haproxy works extremely well. I wish haproxy
supported SSL directly. I realize it's not within the design goals of
haproxy, but the need for this is out there. Good thing nginx + haproxy
works well enough.
-- Harvey
On 3/18/10 3:29 PM, Nicholas Hadaway wrote:
I c
Throw me in a forth on this one. I use nginx 0.8.34 for gzip
compression, RAM caching of static content and SSL offload. All very
simple to configure and low overheads. All requests HTTP and HTTPs go
to Nginx and are then forwarded to HAproxy 1.4.2 as HTTP.
Regards,
Duncan
Harvey Yau wro
The problem with nginx is that it doesnt support chunked-encoding. Since
that is what we are after, we can't use nginx until it supports it or until
we can get rid of chunked encoding. So posting about how good it is working
for you is not really helping our issue. Thanks though.
BR,
Timh
2010/
Chunked encoding support...
http://github.com/agentzh/chunkin-nginx-module
-nick
On 3/22/2010 4:57 AM, Timh Bergström wrote:
The problem with nginx is that it doesnt support chunked-encoding.
Since that is what we are after, we can't use nginx until it supports
it or until we can get rid of c
Thanks, but we've tested that and it seems like a fugly way of doing things
(letting nginx do wrong and rewriting output, seems very inefficient). Also
according to the documentation it only supports POST and not PUT without
additional hacking.
We would love to see a "proper" patch to nginx though
16 matches
Mail list logo
