On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 08:23:16AM -0400, Dickson, Paul wrote: > I'm still battling with it dropping connections. After monstrously > increasing(went from 50000 to 10000000)
well, that's just slightly below 3 hours. Why don't you set "24h" or "48h" ? > my timeout settings for client > and server per the example conf file someone here sent me, it much > improved but eventually did still timeout and drop the session. I don't > need terminal services sessions to time out because the terminal servers > handle this and drop the connection themselves. That's assuming you never lose one of those servers. > I set client and server to 0(zero) in hopes that would mean never > timeout. When starting HAProxy with the -V switch I get a warning about > that setting and how I should change it, but it doesn't tell me if that > means it will never timeout or something else. Can someone shed some > light on this? Zero does indeed disable timeouts. But there's a reason for the warning. If you get stuck sessions because you sometimes lose a server or because you have any intermediate active equipment (eg: a firwall) between haproxy and your servers, the only way you'll be able to purge the dead sessions will be by restarting haproxy. This is clearly dirtier than setting a proper timeout. Haproxy supports timeouts up to about 24 days. That should be plenty for anyone even with terminal sessions. Clearly, there is absolutely no justification for having no timeout in any network-based client, server or application. This is plain wrong and indicates a mis-understanding of how network components communicate. I regularly see applications which need a reboot because of too many dead connections to an LDAP or SQL server. This really is a shame ! Regards, Willy
