The problem with nginx is that it doesnt support chunked-encoding. Since
that is what we are after, we can't use nginx until it supports it or until
we can get rid of chunked encoding. So posting about how good it is working
for you is not really helping our issue. Thanks though.
BR,
Timh
Chunked encoding support...
http://github.com/agentzh/chunkin-nginx-module
-nick
On 3/22/2010 4:57 AM, Timh Bergström wrote:
The problem with nginx is that it doesnt support chunked-encoding.
Since that is what we are after, we can't use nginx until it supports
it or until we can get rid of
Hi,
Did you observe anything special about the CPU usage ? Was it lower
than with 1.3 ? If so, it would indicate some additional delay somewhere.
If it was higher, it could indicate that the Transfer-encoding parser
takes too many cycles but my preliminary tests proved it to be quite
Hello,
Unfortunately I the show errors returned empty, so I guess it
was something else. The good news is that I gave haproxy 1.4.2 a
try today and the 502/PR error with PUT/TE:chunked requests have
now vanished. So thanks for solving this. I'm not sure which one of
the bugs I was hitting
Hi Erik,
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 02:29:46PM +0100, Erik Gulliksson wrote:
Unfortunately I the show errors returned empty, so I guess it was
something else. The good news is that I gave haproxy 1.4.2 a try today
and the 502/PR error with PUT/TE:chunked requests have now vanished.
So thanks for
Hi Malte,
So now when I got a working haproxy 1.4, I continued to try out
the option http-server-close but I hit a problem with our
stunnel (patched with stunnel-4.22-xforwarded-for.diff) instances.
It does not support keep-alive, so only the first HTTP request in
a keepalive-session gets
So now when I got a working haproxy 1.4, I continued to try out the
option http-server-close but I hit a problem with our stunnel
(patched with stunnel-4.22-xforwarded-for.diff) instances. It does not
support keep-alive, so only the first HTTP request in a
keepalive-session gets the
Hi Willy
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 3:08 PM, Willy Tarreau w...@1wt.eu wrote:
OK so very likely it's the same problem I fixed yesterday using Bernhard's
captures.
Great! Thanks to Bernhard as well then, for providing you with the captures.
yes indeed it's expected. Stunnel is not designed to
Hi Erik,
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 10:27:38AM +0100, Erik Gulliksson wrote:
Hi Willy,
Thanks for your elaborative answer.
Did you observe anything special about the CPU usage ? Was it lower
than with 1.3 ? If so, it would indicate some additional delay somewhere.
If it was higher, it
Hi!
First, I'd like to thank Willy and the other haproxy contributors for
bringing this wonderful piece of software into the world :)
For the last 2 years now we have been running haproxy 1.3 successfully
to load balance our frontend applications and storage services. Mainly
the requests passing
Hi Erik,
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 11:08:08AM +0100, Erik Gulliksson wrote:
Hi!
First, I'd like to thank Willy and the other haproxy contributors for
bringing this wonderful piece of software into the world :)
Thanks !
For the last 2 years now we have been running haproxy 1.3 successfully
11 matches
Mail list logo
