Hi Pieter,
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 10:46:50PM +0200, PiBa-NL wrote:
> Seems i kept you busy for another day.. But the result is there, it looks
> 100% fixed to me :).
Excellent, thanks for the fast feedback! We're getting there :-)
I'm starting to really like our new development model, as for th
Hi Willy,
Op 11-6-2019 om 11:37 schreef Willy Tarreau:
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 09:06:46AM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:
I'd like you to give it a try in your environment to confirm whether or
not it does improve things. If so, I'll clean it up and merge it. I'm
also interested in any reproducer y
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 09:06:46AM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> I'd like you to give it a try in your environment to confirm whether or
> not it does improve things. If so, I'll clean it up and merge it. I'm
> also interested in any reproducer you could have, given that the made up
> test case I d
Hit enter too fast, with the patch now.
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 09:06:46AM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> Hi again Pieter,
>
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 04:24:47AM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> > I'm
> > going to have a look at this this morning. I now see how to make things
> > worse to observe the
Hi again Pieter,
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 04:24:47AM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> I'm
> going to have a look at this this morning. I now see how to make things
> worse to observe the changes, I suspect that forcing a high nbthread and
> binding all of them to a single CPU should reveal the issue m
Hi Pieter,
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 12:38:42AM +0200, PiBa-NL wrote:
> After a bit more fiddling i noticed that the new startup method seems more
> CPU intensive.
> Also it can be seen the vtest does take a bit longer to pass 1.3sec v.s.
> 0.8sec even though the health-check durations themselves ar
Hi Willy,
Op 10-6-2019 om 16:14 schreef Willy Tarreau:
Hi Pieter,
On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 04:06:13PM +0200, PiBa-NL wrote:
Things certainly look better again now regarding this issue.
Ah cool!
Running the test repeatedly, and manually looking over the results its
pretty much as good as it w
Hi Pieter,
On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 04:06:13PM +0200, PiBa-NL wrote:
> Things certainly look better again now regarding this issue.
Ah cool!
> Running the test repeatedly, and manually looking over the results its
> pretty much as good as it was before. There seems to be a 1 ms increase in
> the
Hi Willy,
Op 10-6-2019 om 11:09 schreef Willy Tarreau:
Hi Pieter,
On Sat, Jun 08, 2019 at 06:07:09AM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:
Hi Pieter,
On Fri, Jun 07, 2019 at 11:32:18PM +0200, PiBa-NL wrote:
Hi Willy,
After the commit "6ec902a MINOR: threads: serialize threads initialization"
however
Hi Pieter,
On Sat, Jun 08, 2019 at 06:07:09AM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> Hi Pieter,
>
> On Fri, Jun 07, 2019 at 11:32:18PM +0200, PiBa-NL wrote:
> > Hi Willy,
> >
> > After the commit "6ec902a MINOR: threads: serialize threads initialization"
> > however i have failing / slow health checks in
Hi Pieter,
On Fri, Jun 07, 2019 at 11:32:18PM +0200, PiBa-NL wrote:
> Hi Willy,
>
> After the commit "6ec902a MINOR: threads: serialize threads initialization"
> however i have failing / slow health checks in the tls_health_checks.vtc
> test. Before that the Layer7-OK takes 5ms after this commit
Hi Willy,
After the commit "6ec902a MINOR: threads: serialize threads
initialization" however i have failing / slow health checks in the
tls_health_checks.vtc test. Before that the Layer7-OK takes 5ms after
this commit the healthcheck takes up to 75ms or even more.. It causes
the 20ms connect
12 matches
Mail list logo
