Thanks for all the suggestions, i'm going to try them. Do you think
that this value of BUFSIZE may cause some security or perfomance
issues in haproxy?
Regards,
Héctor Paz
On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 1:27 AM, Willy Tarreau w...@1wt.eu wrote:
If you don't have too much traffic or can try it by
I wanted to report after using 1.4-dev6 for several sites for a couple days
that the results seem very good.
One site was peaking at over 150 Mbps and over 65 million hits past couple of
days, during that time memory use stayed steady between 1.5-2.5 GB and went
down when load went down.
On
On Sat, Jan 09, 2010 at 06:24:46PM +, Hector Danniel Paz Trillo wrote:
Thanks for all the suggestions, i'm going to try them. Do you think
that this value of BUFSIZE may cause some security or perfomance
issues in haproxy?
no, in fact it may even improve performance to have larger buffers.
On Sat, Jan 09, 2010 at 11:03:16AM -0800, Hank A. Paulson wrote:
I wanted to report after using 1.4-dev6 for several sites for a couple days
that the results seem very good.
One site was peaking at over 150 Mbps and over 65 million hits past couple
of days, during that time memory use
Hi Willy,
Le Samedi 9 Janvier 2010 14:01:36, Willy Tarreau a écrit :
(...)
One thing I suspect would be that we simply fail to free lots of
allocated memory and that the last pool_alloc() returns NULL due
to lack of memory, hence the segfault. But I also suspect that we
*may* end up
5 matches
Mail list logo
