Hey guys,
I'm trying to find a solution to a problem I'm having This might be
a unique use case, but the "why" is a bit complicated so I'll just leave
that out of the picture for now.
I would like to make a maximum of 50 requests per second to my backend
(or, optionally, one request per
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 1:06 PM, Will Buckner wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
> I'm seeing an interesting thing with 1.3.x in my production environment... I
> have my stats_uri defined as /proxy_http_stats, requiring a username and
> password. When I access this URL, about half the time I'm taken to a 404
> p
Hey guys,
I'm seeing an interesting thing with 1.3.x in my production
environment... I have my stats_uri defined as /proxy_http_stats,
requiring a username and password. When I access this URL, about half
the time I'm taken to a 404 page on my destination servers (haproxy
never catches the re
Hi,
On Sat, Apr 04, 2009 at 07:46:28PM +0400, Alexey wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I saw post about delaying incoming smtp connections via haproxy. Looks like I
> need transparent proxy for saving source ip addresses, but it requires TPROXY
> in linux kernel.
yes it does.
> I need to patch kernel + iptabl
Hi,
I saw post about delaying incoming smtp connections via haproxy. Looks like I
need transparent proxy for saving source ip addresses, but it requires TPROXY
in linux kernel. I need to patch kernel + iptables for make it working? What
difference between squid and haproxy transparenting (squi
On Sat, Apr 04, 2009 at 11:43:38AM -0300, Nicolas Cohen wrote:
> Hi Willy,
>
> It seems right to implement it.
> I'll review this with the team and let you know once we have an
> available patch.
Nice, thanks!
Willy
Hi Willy,
It seems right to implement it.
I'll review this with the team and let you know once we have an
available patch.
regards,
n.
On 04/04/2009, at 03:49, Willy Tarreau wrote:
Hi Nicolas,
On Fri, Apr 03, 2009 at 10:29:32PM -0300, Nicolas Cohen wrote:
hi,
i want to use haproxy to lo
On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 3:30 PM, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 04, 2009 at 10:20:23AM +0800, Jeffrey 'jf' Lim wrote:
>> > OK maybe "use" is OK in fact, considering the alternatives.
>> >
>>
>> :) some proposals for the keywords:
>>
>> for/use
>> condition/use
>> cond/use
>>
>> (cond/use seems
On Sat, Apr 04, 2009 at 10:20:23AM +0800, Jeffrey 'jf' Lim wrote:
> > OK maybe "use" is OK in fact, considering the alternatives.
> >
>
> :) some proposals for the keywords:
>
> for/use
> condition/use
> cond/use
>
> (cond/use seems the best compromise - short, but understandable enough)
what w
9 matches
Mail list logo