Hi,
Le 09/05/2012 07:04, Baptiste a écrit :
Hi,
Yes, appsession has been obsoleted by "cookie" and "set-cookie" stick
tables pattern extraction (in HAProxy 1.5-dev7 as far as I remember).
As an example:
stick-table type string len 32 size 10K
stick store-response set-cookie(PHPSESSID)
st
Hi,
Yes, appsession has been obsoleted by "cookie" and "set-cookie" stick
tables pattern extraction (in HAProxy 1.5-dev7 as far as I remember).
As an example:
stick-table type string len 32 size 10K
stick store-response set-cookie(PHPSESSID)
stick on cookie(PHPSESSID)
or, better, if your cook
Hi Aleks,
On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 12:26:38AM +0200, Aleksandar Lazic wrote:
> After all this changes is it still necessary to have the appsession
> directive in haproxy?
>
> Could it not be removed to avoid confusions and future question what
> should be used appsession
> or *cook*?
I remember
Yes it is the lookup that I am worried about.
On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 5:46 PM, Baptiste wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Willy has just released 1.5-dev9, but unfortunately the track
> functions can't yet track strings (and so URLs).
> I'll let you know once a nightly snapshot could do it and we could
> work on
Hi,
On 08-05-2012 22:33, Willy Tarreau wrote:
Hi all,
I found some time to work on haproxy last weeks and to perform a
number of
fundamental changes that have been needed for a long time.
[snipp]
Some of these changes conflicted with the ACL and pattern frameworks,
so it
was the right mo
> I know but as you're well aware, the most important for me is to ensure
> that we can concurrently work on this code. So I sometimes prefer delay
> minor features to focus on architectural changes which allow multiple
> persons to develop in parallel. This is the most important as I'm still
> too
On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 11:38:53PM +0200, Baptiste wrote:
> > I thought I could make the track-sc1 and track-sc2 actions track headers but
> > some more changes were needed that were out of the scope of all these
> > changes,
> > so I left them for later.
> >
>
> That is really sad :)
No it's no
Hi,
Willy has just released 1.5-dev9, but unfortunately the track
functions can't yet track strings (and so URLs).
I'll let you know once a nightly snapshot could do it and we could
work on a proof of concept configuration.
Concerning 250K URLs, that should not be an issue at all to store them.
M
> I thought I could make the track-sc1 and track-sc2 actions track headers but
> some more changes were needed that were out of the scope of all these changes,
> so I left them for later.
>
That is really sad :)
Hopefully you'll be able to add string tracking to track-sc[12] soon,
cause we'll be a
On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 08:35:26PM +0100, Jonathan Matthews wrote:
> On 8 May 2012 20:24, Emmanuel Bézagu wrote:
> >
> > you're right but this works only with a single protocol managed by haproxy,
> > doesn't it ?
> > My idea was to have an ACL for each of these standard protocols in order to
>
On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 03:58:21PM -0400, KT Walrus wrote:
>
> On May 8, 2012, at 2:01 PM, Willy Tarreau wrote:
>
> > That's why with the guys from Squid, Varnish and Wingate we presented
> > an concurrent proposal to the IETF one month ago :
> >
> > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-tarreau-htt
Hi all,
I found some time to work on haproxy last weeks and to perform a number of
fundamental changes that have been needed for a long time.
First, while working on SSL and Compression at Exceliance, we found that the
way the internal buffers and the HTTP m
Great.
So any ideas how many urls one can story in these sticky tables before it
becomes a problem?
Would 250K be something of a concern?
On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 11:26 AM, Baptiste wrote:
> On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 3:25 PM, S Ahmed wrote:
> > Ok that sounds awesome, how will that work though? i
On May 8, 2012, at 2:01 PM, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> That's why with the guys from Squid, Varnish and Wingate we presented
> an concurrent proposal to the IETF one month ago :
>
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-tarreau-httpbis-network-friendly-00
>
I hope that HTTP 2.0 requires encryption/com
On 8 May 2012 20:24, Emmanuel Bézagu wrote:
>
> you're right but this works only with a single protocol managed by haproxy,
> doesn't it ?
> My idea was to have an ACL for each of these standard protocols in order to
> have a specific backend.
1) That's why there are different ports for differe
you're right but this works only with a single protocol managed by haproxy,
doesn't it ?
My idea was to have an ACL for each of these standard protocols in order to
have a specific backend.
Regards,
Emmanuel
*Adoptez l'éco-attitude.*
N'imprimez ce courriel que si c'est vraiment nécessaire
2012/
very much so, thanks Willy
On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 2:01 PM, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 06:57:04PM +0200, Baptiste wrote:
> > "Never" unless SPDY become the new standard for HTTP/2.0, validated by
> IETF.
> >
> > To be honest, I talk from time to time to Willy abou
Hi,
On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 06:57:04PM +0200, Baptiste wrote:
> "Never" unless SPDY become the new standard for HTTP/2.0, validated by IETF.
>
> To be honest, I talk from time to time to Willy about SPDY protocol.
> And he does not want to implement a protocol which is not a standard
> within HAP
"Never" unless SPDY become the new standard for HTTP/2.0, validated by IETF.
To be honest, I talk from time to time to Willy about SPDY protocol.
And he does not want to implement a protocol which is not a standard
within HAProxy.
He prefers waiting for the standardized HTTP/2.0 and because some
s
On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 06:14:15PM +0200, Benedikt Fraunhofer wrote:
> > For such border-line uses, you need to enable "option http-no-delay". By
>
> great! that did it.
Fine, thanks for your feedback.
> Does haproxy even discard the PUSH Flag on tcp-packets? or is
> microsoft simply not sending
why never?
F5 just announced support for it
http://www.slideshare.net/f5dotcom/f5-ado-slide-share
I appreciate it is not a standard... yet ... but never is such a strong
word and seems shortsighted
is there something I am missing why you would say never?
On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 6:25 PM, Baptiste
Hello Willy,
2012/5/8 Willy Tarreau :
> For such border-line uses, you need to enable "option http-no-delay". By
great! that did it.
> default, haproxy tries to merge as many TCP segments as possible. But in
> your case, the application is abusing the HTTP protocol by expecting that
Does hapro
Hello Benedikt,
On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 05:33:46PM +0200, Benedikt Fraunhofer wrote:
> Hello List,
>
> I placed haproxy in front of our exchange cluster for OutlookAnywhere
> Clients (that's just RPCoverHTTP, port 443). SSL is terminated by
> pound and forwards traffic on loopback to haproxy.
>
Hello List,
I placed haproxy in front of our exchange cluster for OutlookAnywhere
Clients (that's just RPCoverHTTP, port 443). SSL is terminated by
pound and forwards traffic on loopback to haproxy.
Everything works but it's awfully slow when i use "mode http";
requests look like this:
RPC_IN_DA
On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 3:25 PM, S Ahmed wrote:
> Ok that sounds awesome, how will that work though? i.e. from say java, how
> will I do that?
>
> From what your saying it sounds like I will just have to modify the response
> add and a particular header. And on the flip side, if I want to unblock
Press Release
The American Grants and Loans Catalog is now available. Our new and revised
2012 edition contains more than 2800 financial programs, subsidies,
scholarships,
grants and loans offered by the US federal government.
In addition you will also have access to over 2400 programs funded
Ok that sounds awesome, how will that work though? i.e. from say java, how
will I do that?
>From what your saying it sounds like I will just have to modify the
response add and a particular header. And on the flip side, if I want to
unblock I'll make a http request with something in the header t
Thanks, that seems to have helped.
On 2 May 2012 23:06, Baptiste wrote:
> Hi,
>
> You should enable "http-server-close" option in both frontend and
> backend or in defaults section.
> Otherwise, the first request is the only logged (tunnel mode).
>
> cheers
>
>
> On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 12:53 PM,
Hi,
I'd agree with that choice, they don't look very pretty but we have
found them very reliable especially with Intel SSDs:
We have a good 500+ Loadbalancer.org customers are on that platform:
http://uk.loadbalancer.org/r16.php
On 8 May 2012 09:21, Timh Bergström wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would
On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 4:39 AM, S Ahmed wrote:
> I agree it will add overheard for each call.
>
> Well would there a way for me to somehow tell haproxy from my application to
> block a particular url, and then send another api call to allow traffic from
> that url?
This is different.
Soon, you'll
Hi Malcolm,
On Mon, May 07, 2012 at 06:19:36PM -0700, Malcolm Handley wrote:
> I'd like to write an ACL that compares the integer value of a cookie
> with a constant. (My goal is to be able to block percentiles of our
> users if we have more traffic than we can handle, so I want to block a
> reque
Hi,
I would highly recommend Supermicro's Atom-boxes, they do have
Intel-chips (dual-gig) on-board in their mini-19" servers (if you find
the right one). You can use a SSD-drive and you're down to very few
moving parts.
Link: http://www.supermicro.com/products/nfo/atom.cfm
Good luck!
Timh Bergs
32 matches
Mail list logo
