On 14 November 2014 22:59, Gorj Design ( Dragos ) wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have been using Haproxy to split the traffic between my servers.
> I have a haproxy server and 2 servers that receive the traffic using round
> robin .
> The traffic is split usually very good 50 % on one server and 50 % on t
Is there a way to do a multi-line reqirep? I want to set the host and port
based on elements in the path. Something like this where some path parts
end up in a rewritten host:
http://some.domain.com:80/dynamic/evaluation/1400/path ->
http://evaluation.domain.com:1400/dynamic/path
(The 'evaluation
Hello,
I have been using Haproxy to split the traffic between my servers.I have a
haproxy server and 2 servers that receive the traffic using round robin .The
traffic is split usually very good 50 % on one server and 50 % on the other.
But at some point, the traffic gets in so fast for example
On 11/14/2014 11:09 AM, Shawn Heisey wrote:
> I have a co-worker that is concerned with the idea of moving SSL
> termination to haproxy, rather than using LVS to NAT the SSL to back end
> servers directly. It would be handled by one machine, with
> corosync/pacemaker providing responsive failover
Does haproxy have support for fair share concurrent request scheduling?
Description:
Give each user at least their fair share of concurrent connections based on the
current number of users and if capacity exceeds that allotment fairly share
the excess capacity among those users that have requeste
To add to this, this only happens in http-keep-alive mode and it
appears to be closing the connection without sending a response back
if it is not the first transaction in the keep-alive session and there
is a server side connection timeout. If I use option httpclose there
are no status codes of -1
Baptiste,
I was hoping that was not the case :-).
My main goal was to make it completely application agnostic, never
mind I'll stick with the application cookie version.
Thanks very much.
On 14 November 2014 15:40, Baptiste wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 1:01 PM, Malcolm Turnbull
> wrote:
I have a co-worker that is concerned with the idea of moving SSL
termination to haproxy, rather than using LVS to NAT the SSL to back end
servers directly. It would be handled by one machine, with
corosync/pacemaker providing responsive failover to a redundant host.
Below is the CPU info from one
If you missed it: http://marc.info/?l=haproxy&m=141561304511354&w=2
Anyone?
Am 10.11.2014 10:49 schrieb Philipp:
Hello,
this is confusing me and maybe someone could shed some light (or
reasoning) into the count/sums
for the http-responses from frontend and backends.
Hi Willy,
I read the explanation, but cannot make any sense of the last column when
ran on my data:
head:
0.1832 0 0 1 1
0.216650 0 1 5013
0.324980 0 1 5014
0.433310 0 1 5014
tail:
99.5 828754 1006
>> Be advisted that OCSP stapling is slowly dying , check [2] and
>> [3].
>
> I hope not. OCSP without stapling is dying, yes, but OCSP stapling along
> with the X.509 Must Staple extension [1], and mode likely the X.509 TLS
> feature extension [2], are a scalable way of solving a real problem.
>
>
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 1:01 PM, Malcolm Turnbull
wrote:
> I was just playing around with the configuration from the excellent
> blog entry on e-commerce overload protection:
> http://blog.haproxy.com/2012/09/19/application-delivery-controller-and-ecommerce-websites/
>
> If you have a PHPSession o
Hi Jeff,
What you want to use here is track.
backend be-1
server1 10.10.10.10:80 check inter 1000 rise 2 fall 2
server2 10.10.10.20:80 check inter 1000 rise 2 fall 2
backend be-2
server1 10.10.10.10:80 track be-1/server1
server2 10.10.10.20:80 track be-1/server1
Tait
On Fri, No
It looks like if i have a server which is a part of more than one backend,
that server gets multiple health checks instead of one. Could someone confirm
or disconfirm that please? If this is true, could you accept this as a change
request to make the behavior a little smarter? thanks
Jeff
On 11/13/2014 05:36 PM, Lukas Tribus wrote:
> Be advisted that OCSP stapling is slowly dying , check [2] and
> [3].
I hope not. OCSP without stapling is dying, yes, but OCSP stapling along
with the X.509 Must Staple extension [1], and mode likely the X.509 TLS
feature extension [2], are a scalabl
I was just playing around with the configuration from the excellent
blog entry on e-commerce overload protection:
http://blog.haproxy.com/2012/09/19/application-delivery-controller-and-ecommerce-websites/
If you have a PHPSession or ASPsessionID cookie then you can track the
total number of users
Pixelbuddha
summer‘s coming trimm your sheeps
Take a Wild Ride with Insatiable
Insatiable is one wild ride. This is the amazingly true story of a very
debaucherous individual, who lives every aspect of his life to the razor's
edge. Marc Siegel takes the reader from his first sex act to h
Title: ZEturf grille
Si vous ne voyez pas correctement ce message, visualisez notre version en ligne.
Pour être sûr de recevoir tous nos emails, ajoutez newslet...@email.zeturf.com à votre carnet d´adresses
Pour ne plus recevoir de messages de notre part
Hi,
> I actually suspect most of that time due to our own code running in
> Liferay/Tomcat, but I'd like to be able to say that I've done everything
> I can to eliminate TCP, HTTP, and SSL as bottlenecks. If haproxy with a
> recent openssl will automatically do dynamic record sizes without
> con
19 matches
Mail list logo
