Re: very low requests per second rate with option forceclose (now with details)

2017-08-16 Thread Stefan Sticht
Hi, please do not bother ay further about this. I had an iptables rate limit of 25 SYN requests per second configured. Sorry for wasting your time. Stefan > On 16 Aug 2017, at 20:35, Stefan Sticht wrote: > > Hi, > > sorry I missed to tell details: haproxy and webservers are running Ubuntu

Re: very low requests per second rate with option forceclose (now with details)

2017-08-16 Thread Holger Just
Hi Stefan Stefan Sticht wrote: > I also can test the webserver directly bypassing the haproxy completely > (apache2.4 on webserver has "KeepAlive Off” configured) > $ ab -v 1 -c 10 -n 1000 http://10.27.100.45/test/index.html | grep -e > Requests -e Complete -e Failed > Complete requests: 1000

very low requests per second rate with option forceclose (now with details)

2017-08-16 Thread Stefan Sticht
Hi, sorry I missed to tell details: haproxy and webservers are running Ubuntu 16.04.3 LTS I am testing HA-Proxy version 1.6.3 2015/12/25 and HA-Proxy version 1.7.8-1ppa1~xenial 2017/07/09 I also can test the webserver directly bypassing the haproxy completely (apache2.4 on webserver has "KeepA

very low requests per second rate with option forceclose

2017-08-16 Thread Stefan Sticht
Hi, I need help with my haproxy config. I have been asked to disable keepalive in haproxy. As soon as I use "option forceclose” the requests per second rate mesured with apachebench goes down form like 1000 requests per second to 25 requests per second. frontend w-test-kon bind *:8000

Re: FreeBSD CPU Affinity

2017-08-16 Thread Olivier Houchard
On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 11:43:30AM -0400, Mark Staudinger wrote: > On Wed, 16 Aug 2017 11:32:01 -0400, Olivier Houchard > wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 11:28:52AM -0400, Mark Staudinger wrote: > > > On Wed, 16 Aug 2017 10:47:32 -0400, Dmitry Sivachenko > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >

Re: FreeBSD CPU Affinity

2017-08-16 Thread Mark Staudinger
On Wed, 16 Aug 2017 11:32:01 -0400, Olivier Houchard wrote: On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 11:28:52AM -0400, Mark Staudinger wrote: On Wed, 16 Aug 2017 10:47:32 -0400, Dmitry Sivachenko wrote: > > > On 16 Aug 2017, at 17:40, Mark Staudinger > > wrote: > > > > On Wed, 16 Aug 2017 10:35:05 -0400

Re: FreeBSD CPU Affinity

2017-08-16 Thread Olivier Houchard
On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 11:28:52AM -0400, Mark Staudinger wrote: > On Wed, 16 Aug 2017 10:47:32 -0400, Dmitry Sivachenko > wrote: > > > > > > On 16 Aug 2017, at 17:40, Mark Staudinger > > > wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, 16 Aug 2017 10:35:05 -0400, Dmitry Sivachenko > > > wrote: > > > > > > > He

Re: FreeBSD CPU Affinity

2017-08-16 Thread Mark Staudinger
On Wed, 16 Aug 2017 10:47:32 -0400, Dmitry Sivachenko wrote: On 16 Aug 2017, at 17:40, Mark Staudinger wrote: On Wed, 16 Aug 2017 10:35:05 -0400, Dmitry Sivachenko wrote: Hello, are you installing haproxy form FreeBSD ports? I just tried your configuration and it works as you ex

Re: FreeBSD CPU Affinity

2017-08-16 Thread Mark Staudinger
On Wed, 16 Aug 2017 10:47:32 -0400, Dmitry Sivachenko wrote: Strange. I am testing on FreeBSD-10-stable though. May be you add return code check for cpuset_setaffinity() and log possible error? That might be relevant. My FreeBSD-10.0 test server does also exhibit the expected behavior

Re: FreeBSD CPU Affinity

2017-08-16 Thread Dmitry Sivachenko
> On 16 Aug 2017, at 17:40, Mark Staudinger wrote: > > On Wed, 16 Aug 2017 10:35:05 -0400, Dmitry Sivachenko > wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> are you installing haproxy form FreeBSD ports? >> >> I just tried your configuration and it works as you expect. >> >> If you are building haproxy by hand

Re: FreeBSD CPU Affinity

2017-08-16 Thread Mark Staudinger
On Wed, 16 Aug 2017 10:35:05 -0400, Dmitry Sivachenko wrote: Hello, are you installing haproxy form FreeBSD ports? I just tried your configuration and it works as you expect. If you are building haproxy by hand, add USE_CPU_AFFINITY=1 parameter to make manually. FreeBSD port do that for

Re: FreeBSD CPU Affinity

2017-08-16 Thread Dmitry Sivachenko
> On 16 Aug 2017, at 17:24, Mark Staudinger wrote: > > Hi Folks, > > Running HAProxy-1.7.8 on FreeBSD-11.0. Working with nbproc=2 to separate > HTTP and HTTPS portions of the config. Hello, are you installing haproxy form FreeBSD ports? I just tried your configuration and it works as you

FreeBSD CPU Affinity

2017-08-16 Thread Mark Staudinger
Hi Folks, Running HAProxy-1.7.8 on FreeBSD-11.0. Working with nbproc=2 to separate HTTP and HTTPS portions of the config. Given the following config: global nbproc 2 cpu-map 1 2-8 cpu-map 2 7-14 After starting HAProxy, there are, as expected, two processes running.

Top decision makers

2017-08-16 Thread Amber Slater
Hi, Would you be interested in a unique list of Top decision makers mention below for your upcoming marketing and strategic moves? Titles: CTO, CIO, CEO, Chief/Head/VP/Director/Manager of IT, Mobility, Telecommunication, Infrastructure, Security, Networking and more. List available by Technol

Issue with src_http_req_rate count

2017-08-16 Thread Sikander Dhaliwal
Dear Support, We are using HA-Proxy version 1.8-dev1-7b67726 on four servers. To handle the DDOS attacks, we have configured sticky-table rules. The issue is, the same configuration is working on 3 servers but not on one server. All the server packages,haproxy version and configuration file is s

Re: Re: CPU 100% when waiting for the client timeout

2017-08-16 Thread baiyang
Hi there, Has this bug fix now in 1.6.13 or 1.7.8 ? We have confirmed this bug still exists in 1.6.3. Thanks :-) -- Best Regards BaiYang baiy...@gmail.com http://baiy.cn < END OF EMAIL > From: baiyang Date: 2015-12-03 18:44 To: Willy Tarreau CC: CyrilBonté; Lukas Trib

stick-table, fullconn and maxconn semantics while nbproc > 1

2017-08-16 Thread baiyang
Hi, On my understanding, "globle.maxconn", "backend.maxconn", "backend.fullconn" and "stick-table" all use the per-process semantics, right? E.g.: If nbproc = 9 and we have this directive in a frontend or backend: "stick-table type ip size 1m expire 1m store conn_cur,conn_rate(10s),http_req_ra