Hi,
We are having some issues recently when calling a specific url, we are
getting the following error on the client side :
* "Empty reply from server"
The problem is that Haproxy is not logging any of these errors, and more
of that it shows a html 200 code.
After some research, it seems
Hello,
I found you are doing Adwords campaign for your website. Are you really
getting a return on your hard earned money by investing in Adwords?
Your website looks fine, but I think you are not receiving the anticipated
outcome from it. If you allow me I would like to offer you another
proposi
Hello,
Trying to set backend by regexp
This regexp works outside of haproxy
String:
/1.0/manage/bu/ca?token=68bf68bf68bf68bf68bf&segId=1212121212&partner=123456789
Regexp:
^\/1\.0\/manage\/bu\/ca\?token=.*.segId=.*=123456789
What is the right syntax for this in haproxy ?
Thank you
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
Hi,
On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 02:17:59AM +, Thrawn wrote:
> Mea culpa, I applied the patch incorrectly. After fixing that, I can
> successfully build with 'USE_THREAD=' but without 'USE_PTHREAD_PSHARED=yes'
> (although from what Olivier said, I probably shouldn't do that). On
> Wednesday, 1
Willy,
Am 18.07.2018 um 14:30 schrieb Willy Tarreau:
>> I can rework the patch, if technical changes look good to you. There's a
>> ton of memcpy in there to not destroy the data structures needed for the
>> actual communication: make_proxy_line() now always operates on a copy of
>> `struct connec
Hi Tim,
On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 01:48:01PM +0200, Tim Düsterhus wrote:
> This would solve the issue for my use case and should not break anything
> (a few UNKNOWNs will become TCP6 then).
OK.
> I can rework the patch, if technical changes look good to you. There's a
> ton of memcpy in there to n
Willy,
Am 18.07.2018 um 04:25 schrieb Willy Tarreau:
> What I would suggest would be to only "upgrade" the addresses to IPv6
> if either side already is on IPv6, but never downgrade from IPv6 to
> IPv4 since v6-mapped v4 addresses can exist on both sides for a valid
> reason.
>
This would solve
On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 01:49:40PM +0200, Thierry Fournier wrote:
> > Could you guys please give it a try to confirm ? I'll then merge it.
>
>
> i, the patch works for me with backport to the 1.8 version. It is on
> productio stage.
OK thank you Thierry, now merged.
Willy
9 matches
Mail list logo
