> On 22 Aug 2018, at 06:00, Patrick Hemmer <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 2018/7/18 09:03, Frederic Lecaille wrote:
>> Hello Patrick, 
>> 
>> On 07/17/2018 03:59 PM, Patrick Hemmer wrote: 
>>> Ping? 
>>> 
>>> -Patrick 
>>> 
>>> On 2018/6/22 15:10, Patrick Hemmer wrote: 
>>>> When using core.msleep in lua, the %Tw metric is a negative value. 
>>>> 
>>>> For example with the following config: 
>>>> haproxy.cfg: 
>>>>         global 
>>>>             lua-load /tmp/haproxy.lua 
>>>> 
>>>>         frontend f1 
>>>>             mode http 
>>>>             bind :8000 
>>>>             default_backend b1 
>>>>             log 127.0.0.1:1234 daemon 
>>>>             log-format Ta=%Ta\ Tc=%Tc\ Td=%Td\ Th=%Th\ Ti=%Ti\ Tq=%Tq\ 
>>>> TR=%TR\ Tr=%Tr\ Tt=%Tt\ Tw=%Tw 
>>>> 
>>>>         backend b1 
>>>>             mode http 
>>>>             http-request use-service lua.foo 
>>>> 
>>>> haproxy.lua: 
>>>>         core.register_service("foo", "http", function(applet) 
>>>>             core.msleep(100) 
>>>>             applet:set_status(200) 
>>>>             applet:start_response() 
>>>>         end) 
>>>> 
>>>> The log contains: 
>>>>     Ta=104 Tc=0 Td=0 Th=0 Ti=0 Tq=104 TR=104 Tr=104 Tt=104 Tw=-104 
>>>> 
>>>> ^ TR also looks wrong, as it did not take 104ms to receive the full 
>>>> request. 
>>>> 
>>>> This is built from the commit before current master: d8fd2af 
>>>> 
>>>> -Patrick 
>>> 
>> 
>> The patch attached to this mail fixes this issue at least for %TR field. 
>> 
>> But I am not sure at all it is correct or if there is no remaining issues. 
>> For instance the LUA tcp callback also updates the tv_request log field. 
>> 
>> So, let's wait for Thierry's validation.


Hi,

Applets should be considered as server independent from HAProxy, so applet 
should not
change HAProxy information like log times.

I guess that your patch works, and the function hlua_applet_tcp_fct() should 
follow
the same way.

unfortunately I do not have free time to test all of this changes.

Thierry


>> Regards. 
>> 
> 
> Any update on this?
> 
> -Patrick
> 


Reply via email to