OoO En cette nuit nuageuse du jeudi 27 octobre 2011, vers 00:02, Vivek Malik <vivek.ma...@gmail.com> disait :
> We have been using haproxy in production for around 6 months while > using httpclose. We use functions like reqidel, reqadd to manipulate > request headers and use_backend to route a request to a specific > backend. > We run websites which often have ajax calls and load javascripts and > css files from the server. Thinking about keep alive, I think it > would be desired to keep client side keep alive so that they can > reuse connections to load images, javascript, css and make ajax calls > over it. > From a haproxy request processing and manipulating perspective, Is > there a difference between http-server-close and httpclose? Would > reqadd/reqidel/use_backend work on subsequent requests during client > side keep alive too? Yes. From the documentation: ,---- | By default HAProxy operates in a tunnel-like mode with regards to persistent | connections: for each connection it processes the first request and forwards | everything else (including additional requests) to selected server. Once | established, the connection is persisted both on the client and server | sides. Use "option http-server-close" to preserve client persistent connections | while handling every incoming request individually, dispatching them one after | another to servers, in HTTP close mode. Use "option httpclose" to switch both | sides to HTTP close mode. "option forceclose" and "option | http-pretend-keepalive" help working around servers misbehaving in HTTP close | mode. `---- -- Vincent Bernat ☯ http://vincent.bernat.im Make sure input cannot violate the limits of the program. - The Elements of Programming Style (Kernighan & Plauger)
