Hi Erik,

You just need to enable the "option httplog" in your HAProxy frontend
which is verbose and provide useful information for troubleshooting.


On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 10:52 PM, Erik Torlen
<erik.tor...@apicasystem.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> I will continue testing in a few days and see how the result will turn out to 
> be. We have made a lot of changes
> so we'll see how it goes.
> All of the results include the details of the response time from the loadtest.
> Any recommendations on the logging we can use to get more information on what 
> is happening on the server side?
> We are currently just using syslog.
> /E
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Willy Tarreau [mailto:w...@1wt.eu]
> Sent: den 14 oktober 2011 23:16
> To: Erik Torlen
> Cc: haproxy@formilux.org
> Subject: Re: Keep alive with haproxy & stud
> Hi Erik,
> On Sat, Oct 08, 2011 at 06:40:49PM +0000, Erik Torlen wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I see different results on the keep alive using http vs https.
>> Loadtest against https (through stud) gives me around 69% keep alive 
>> effiency (using 3-20 objects per connection in different tests). When testing
>> through http directly against haproxy I get 99% keep alive with the same 
>> loadtest scripts.
>> I have tried changing timeouts and different modes (http-pretend-keepalive 
>> etc) but still no improvement.
>> Anyone that knows how to improve this and why it's happening?
> If you're trying directly then via stud and see different things, then
> none of the haproxy options (pretend-keepalive, ...) will have any effect.
> It is very possible that timeouts were too low but that would mean you
> were using insanely low timeouts (eg: a few ms). It is also possible
> that the tool you used for the test can't run as many https concurrent
> connections as it runs http connections, and that it closes some of them
> by itself. And it is also possible that there are a few issues with stud.
> While it performs well, it's still young and it is possible that some
> pathological corner cases remain. Haproxy experienced this in its early
> age too. You need to enable logging everywhere and get more precise stats
> from your load testing tool (eg: all response times, not just an average).
> Regards,
> Willy

Reply via email to