Haproxy issue

Hi, I've got an issue with Haproxy conf need help please !! See my haproxy.cfg frontend rest-in bind *:8089 ssl crt /etc/ssl/* reqadd X-Forwarded-Proto:\ https acl host_rest_services hdr(Host) -i test-rest.net use_backend rest_services if host_rest_services backen

haproxy issue

Hi, i have configure haproxy-1.5.4-1.el6.x86_64 with this config frontend inbound-https bind :443 #ssl crt ./my_view_cert.pem mode tcp option tcplog default_backend view_https backend view_https mode tcp option tcplog option httpchk OPTIONS / http-check expect stat

Re: Haproxy issue

On February 14, 2017 at 10:46:05, thibault.dai...@orange.com (thibault.dai...@orange.com) wrote: Hi, I’ve got an issue with Haproxy conf need help please !! See my haproxy.cfg frontend rest-in bind *:8089 ssl crt /etc/ssl/* reqadd X-Forwarded-Prot

Re: Haproxy issue

Hi! >> frontend rest-in >> >> bind *:8089 ssl crt /etc/ssl/* >> >> acl host_rest_services hdr(Host) -i test-rest.net >>

Re: Haproxy issue

vices > backend rest_services > server shstand 10.0.0.2:8089 ssl verify none > So It works > > De : Daniel Schneller [mailto:daniel.schnel...@centerdevice.com] > Envoyé : mardi 14 février 2017 17:17 > À : Skarbek, John > Cc : DAIGNE Thibault OBS/OAB; haproxy+h...@for

Re: haproxy issue

Hi, On Wed, Oct 15, pasquale scalea wrote: > i have configure haproxy-1.5.4-1.el6.x86_64 with this config ... > backend view_https > mode tcp > option tcplog > option httpchk OPTIONS / > http-check expect status 200 > option ssl-hello-chk #make sure we can talk SSL, not just TC

haproxy issue tracker discussion

Hello everyone, as per Tim's suggestion I'm restarting the discussion about the issue tracker, started in "haproxy 1.9 status update" (2018-05-25), Message-ID 20180525161044.ga6...@1wt.eu: https://www.mail-archive.com/haproxy@formilux.org/msg30139.html > It would be nice to show what's pending

Re: haproxy issue tracker discussion

Ansible, for example (https://github.com/ansible/ansible/issues), uses some advanced automation and templates to manage their enormous issues stream. Issue are checked against conforming rules/tests/codestyle checks or, for example, automatically closed due inactivity I believe most if not all solu

Re: haproxy issue tracker discussion

Hi guys, sorry for the long delay, it was not the best week for me to restart all of this discussion, but now it's OK, I'm catching up! On Sun, Jan 06, 2019 at 05:29:43PM +0100, Lukas Tribus wrote: > Hello everyone, > > > as per Tim's suggestion I'm restarting the discussion about the issue > t

Re: haproxy issue tracker discussion

On Sun, Jan 06, 2019 at 07:41:08PM +0300, Alexey Elymanov wrote: > Ansible, for example (https://github.com/ansible/ansible/issues), uses some > advanced automation and templates to manage their enormous issues stream. > Issue are checked against conforming rules/tests/codestyle checks or, for > ex

Re: haproxy issue tracker discussion

Willy, Am 08.01.19 um 18:30 schrieb Willy Tarreau: > I totally agree. This is the tool I'm missing the most currently. I'm > not aware of a *good* and manageable issue tracker. Having a status for > a bug per branch most likely eliminates most of them... I'm not sure this is required. The bugfixe

Re: haproxy issue tracker discussion

On Tue, Jan 08, 2019 at 07:18:07PM +0100, Tim Düsterhus wrote: > Willy, > > Am 08.01.19 um 18:30 schrieb Willy Tarreau: > > I totally agree. This is the tool I'm missing the most currently. I'm > > not aware of a *good* and manageable issue tracker. Having a status for > > a bug per branch most li

Re: haproxy issue tracker discussion

Willy, Am 09.01.19 um 05:31 schrieb Willy Tarreau: > Except that the "naturally" part here is manually performed by someone, > and an issue tracker is nothing more than an organized todo list, which > *is* useful to remind that you missed some backports. It regularly happens > to us, like when the

Re: haproxy issue tracker discussion

Hi Tim, On Wed, Jan 09, 2019 at 12:58:30PM +0100, Tim Düsterhus wrote: > Am 09.01.19 um 05:31 schrieb Willy Tarreau: > > Except that the "naturally" part here is manually performed by someone, > > and an issue tracker is nothing more than an organized todo list, which > > *is* useful to remind tha

Re: haproxy issue tracker discussion

Am 09.01.2019 um 15:22 schrieb Willy Tarreau: > Hi Tim, > > On Wed, Jan 09, 2019 at 12:58:30PM +0100, Tim Düsterhus wrote: >> Am 09.01.19 um 05:31 schrieb Willy Tarreau: >>> Except that the "naturally" part here is manually performed by someone, >>> and an issue tracker is nothing more than an org

Re: haproxy issue tracker discussion

Willy, Am 09.01.19 um 15:22 schrieb Willy Tarreau: >> Here's some more recent projects that probably grew up with GitHub. I >> can't comment how they do the backports, though: >> >> https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues (has LTS / Edge) >> https://github.com/zfsonlinux/zfs/issues (has stable / dev

Re: haproxy issue tracker discussion

Aleks, Am 10.01.19 um 15:30 schrieb Aleksandar Lazic: > In general I also see a huge benefit to add a issue tracker I also know > that's a > workflow change for the developers. > > As I also follow the discussion let suggest me the following. > > * add some templates for the different cases e.

Re: haproxy issue tracker discussion

Hi Tim, On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 04:12:54PM +0100, Tim Düsterhus wrote: > > I tend to think that if labels already mark the relevance to a branch, > > then they override the status and probably we don't really care about > > the status. The "moby" project above does that by the way, with > > "statu

Re: haproxy issue tracker discussion

Willy, Am 10.01.19 um 19:40 schrieb Willy Tarreau: > Conclusion : the affected status is only temporary and enough to go > once the backport is done. This simply means we don't need a "fixed-1.9" > or whatever, we just have to remove the "affected" label exactly as it > would have been if the issu

Re: haproxy issue tracker discussion

Hi Tim, Willy, apologies for not responding sooner, I always have to force myself to policy/organizational discussions, when I can also read stack or straces :) >> When should the binary "issue open" / "issue closed" property be >> toggled? When the issue is fixed in Dev? When the issue is fix

Re: haproxy issue tracker discussion

Hi Lukas, On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 02:53:45AM +0100, Lukas Tribus wrote: > Hi Tim, Willy, > > apologies for not responding sooner, I always have to force myself to > policy/organizational discussions, when I can also read stack or > straces :) You really don't need to apologize :-) > > So in the

Re: haproxy issue tracker discussion

Lukas, Am 12.01.19 um 02:53 schrieb Lukas Tribus: > As our intention I believe is to keep the issue open until all > affected branches are fixed, this github feature is a little > inconvenient. But I guess we can just refer to the issue by prepending > it with "issue" or "bug", so GH doesn't see "

Re: haproxy issue tracker discussion

Willy, Am 12.01.19 um 08:47 schrieb Willy Tarreau: >> The following issue was closed ... : >> https://github.com/lukastribus/hap-issue-trial/issues/3 >> >> from another repository, just because I referenced the issue >> prepending the word "Fix": >> https://github.com/lukastribus/hap-issue-trial-1

Re: haproxy issue tracker discussion

Hi Tim, On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 12:24:23PM +0100, Tim Düsterhus wrote: > > This one is less of a problem because the likelihood that someone writes > > "fixes haproxy/haproxy/#4" in a commit message is particularly low, unless > > they do it on purpose to annoy us of course. > > It would only clo

Re: haproxy issue tracker discussion

Willy, Am 12.01.19 um 12:45 schrieb Willy Tarreau: >> This example makes me wonder, though: Should the various branches be >> separate repositories on GitHub like on haproxy.org or should they be >> actual branches (e.g. 1.8.x in haproxy/haproxy instead of >> haproxy/haproxy-1.8) for the mirror? >

Re: haproxy issue tracker discussion

On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 01:09:08PM +0100, Tim Düsterhus wrote: > Willy, > > Am 12.01.19 um 12:45 schrieb Willy Tarreau: > >> This example makes me wonder, though: Should the various branches be > >> separate repositories on GitHub like on haproxy.org or should they be > >> actual branches (e.g. 1.

Re: haproxy issue tracker discussion

Hello, On Sat, 12 Jan 2019 at 13:38, Willy Tarreau wrote: > > The situation on GitHub does not need to mirror the situation on > > haproxy.org. You could still use separated repositories on haproxy.org > > to separate permissions and push the "validated" commits to GitHub. This > > is what the PH

Re: haproxy issue tracker discussion

Willy, Lukas, Am 14.01.19 um 02:08 schrieb Lukas Tribus: > My simple github script which relays the PR to the mailing list uses > the GH Rest API through the agithub client [1]. I will have a look at > how extensible it is, but extracting labels of closed issues and > reopening it if it contains o

Re: haproxy issue tracker discussion

On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 03:06:54AM +0100, Tim Düsterhus wrote: > May I suggest the following to move forward? (...) > That way we can test the process with a small, unimportant, test issue. > The automated closing based on the labels can than be added a few days > later. I don't expect huge numbers

Re: haproxy issue tracker discussion

y Betreff: Re: haproxy issue tracker discussion On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 03:06:54AM +0100, Tim Düsterhus wrote: > May I suggest the following to move forward? (...) > That way we can test the process with a small, unimportant, test issue. > The automated closing based on the labels can t

Re: haproxy issue tracker discussion

Hello Aleksandar, On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 at 12:54, Aleksandar Lazic wrote: > > Hi. > > As there are now the github templates in the repo can / should we start to > create issues & features on github? Yes, you can go ahead and start filing bugs and features. There's some minor tweaking yet to be

Re: haproxy issue tracker discussion

Cool, thanks :-) Ursprüngliche Nachricht Von: Lukas Tribus Gesendet: 18. Jänner 2019 14:14:06 MEZ An: Aleksandar Lazic CC: haproxy , Willy Tarreau , "Tim Düsterhus" Betreff: Re: haproxy issue tracker discussion Hello Aleksandar, On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 at 12:54,

Active-Passive HAProxy Issue enquiry

Hi, We all know that when we configure HAProxy in the Active-Passive manner then there is a VIP. Outside service will access the VIP and the traffic will be routed to appropriate inner services via Active Load Balancer. I have configured one Active Load Balancer in Site 1 and Passive Load Balance

Need help to reolsve haproxy issue

Can you please help me on this. Haproxy version is : 1.5.4-2.1 Thanks in advance

Re: Active-Passive HAProxy Issue enquiry

On 15 February 2018 at 10:08, Swarup Saha wrote: > Hi, > I need help from HAProxy organization. Hello there. This is the haproxy user mailing list. It is received and read by a wider range of users across the world, many of whom read it in an individual capacity. If you want *commercial* support,

[ANNOUNCE] HAProxy issue tracker is now open

Hi, as mentioned previously on the list, Tim Düsterhus, Willy and myself have been discussing and working on the github issue tracker, setting up issue templates and labels with the purpose to fully open it for everyone. We have now reached that goal and consider the issue tracker ready for every

Re: Need help to reolsve haproxy issue

Some content was missing. Adding again. When we reboot our machine (Where haproxy installed) teh haproxy going to be down and it's not starting after machine boot. When we force to start haproxy service getting below error. Error: Starting haproxy [ALERT] 047/083514 : Starting frontend GLOBAL: err

Re: Need help to reolsve haproxy issue

There are some very knowledgeable people on this list so I'm sure someone can help, however, what might the problem actually be? Aaron West Loadbalancer.org Limited +44 (0)330 380 1064 www.loadbalancer.org On 16 January 2017 at 15:32, Praveen Koppula wrote: > Can you please help me on this. >

Re: Need help to reolsve haproxy issue

Hi Praveen, Am I right in assuming it's a socket for the stats page? Also what user is starting HAproxy because maybe it doesn't have permissions to create the socket? We might need your whole config or at least the GLOBAL section... Aaron West Loadbalancer.org Limited +44 (0)330 380 1064 www.l

Re: Need help to reolsve haproxy issue

Might be a systemd dependency issue, where the socket is not created before the process is started. Baptiste On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 4:46 PM, Aaron West wrote: > Hi Praveen, > > Am I right in assuming it's a socket for the stats page? Also what user is > starting HAproxy because maybe it doesn'

Re: Need help to reolsve haproxy issue

I've not personally had any issues with systemd which I know doesn't mean there isn't any... However, on closer inspection, it gets started through a wrapper "haproxy-systemd-wrapper" for me : [Unit] Description=HAProxy Load Balancer After=network.target [Service] ExecStartPre=/usr/local/sbin/hap

Re: Need help to reolsve haproxy issue

Sorry for the late reply, I was on unplanned leave. What I observed in my investigation, when I commented below line it's working as expected. Means even after reboot the machine the haproxy service get started automatically. #stats socket /etc/haproxy/haproxysock level admin I'm not sure what is