Hi Pieter,

On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 09:30:39PM +0100, PiBa-NL wrote:
> Hi Willy, Olivier,
> Op 12-1-2019 om 13:11 schreef Willy Tarreau:
> > Hi Pieter,
> > 
> > it is needed to prepend this at the beginning of chk_report_conn_err() :
> > 
> >     if (!check->server)
> >             return;
> > 
> > We need to make sure that check->server is properly tested everywhere.
> > With a bit of luck this one was the only remnant.
> > 
> > Thanks!
> > Willy
> With the check above added, mail alerts seem to work properly here, or just
> as good as they used to anyhow.

Great, thank you!

> Once the patches and above addition get committed, that leaves the other
> 'low priority' issue of needing a short timeout to send the exact amount of
> 'expected' mails.
>     EXPECT resp.http.mailsreceived (10) == "16" failed
> To be honest i only noticed it due to making the regtest, and
> double-checking what to expect.. When i validated mails on my actual
> environment it seems to work properly. (Though the server i took out to test
> has a health-check with a 60 second interval..) Anyhow its been like this
> for years afaik, i guess it wont matter much if stays like this a bit
> longer.

I think it'll indeed stay for a while given that I'd like to focus a
bit more on collecting the remaining important stuff for 1.9.2.


Reply via email to