Re: Headers Size

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 buffer

Re: Headers Size

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 wrote: > If you don't have too much traffic or can try it by hand, start it

Re: Headers Size

On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 08:40:59PM -0500, Hector Danniel Paz Trillo wrote: > Thanks Willy! > > I recompile haproxy with: > > "-DBUFSIZE=16000 -DMAXREWRITE=1024 -DSYSTEM_MAXCONN=4" > > It doesn't work. Then I recompile with: > > "-DBUFSIZE=64000 -DMAXREWRITE=1024 -DSYSTEM_MAXCONN=4" > >

Re: Headers Size

Thanks Willy! I recompile haproxy with: "-DBUFSIZE=16000 -DMAXREWRITE=1024 -DSYSTEM_MAXCONN=4" It doesn't work. Then I recompile with: "-DBUFSIZE=64000 -DMAXREWRITE=1024 -DSYSTEM_MAXCONN=4" And it works. But I'm very worried about this value. This is the difference in haproxy logs: DB

Re: Headers Size

socat on the stats socket. For this, run : echo show errors | socat stdio unix-connect: > Maybe I can > avoid compile haproxy and try to decrease the headers size from the > application. This is possible only in 1.4-dev, you can define the limit in the global section (I don&#x

Headers Size

ers? Maybe I can avoid compile haproxy and try to decrease the headers size from the application. This is the log from haproxy when the post is sent: Jan 7 15:13:11 127.0.0.1 haproxy[4372]: X.X.X.X:29320 [07/Jan/2010:15:13:11.105] main bproxy/proxy1 110/0/1/-1/188 502 8396 - - PHVN 615/615/0/0/0