Re: [PATCH 1/2] MEDIUM: add set-priority-class and set-priority-offset

2018-05-30 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Patrick, On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 12:16:27AM -0400, Patrick Hemmer wrote: > > I looked at the code to see if something could cause that. I found that the > > key increment could be a reason (you must restart from the next element, > > not an upper value since there will be many duplicate keys)

Re: [PATCH 1/2] MEDIUM: add set-priority-class and set-priority-offset

2018-05-30 Thread Patrick Hemmer
On 2018/5/30 04:00, Willy Tarreau wrote: > Hi Patrick, > > I'm finally back on this. > > On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 01:05:03AM -0400, Patrick Hemmer wrote: >> On 2018/5/11 12:52, Patrick Hemmer wrote: >>> This adds the set-priority-class and set-priority-offset actions to >>> http-request and

Re: remaining process after (seamless) reload

2018-05-30 Thread William Lallemand
On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 07:57:03PM +0200, Tim Düsterhus wrote: > William, > > Am 30.05.2018 um 19:45 schrieb William Lallemand: > >> @William Lallemand Possibly the sd_notifyf should be moved below > >> mworker_unblock_signals in mworker_wait? > >> > > > > This shouldn't happen with or without

Re: remaining process after (seamless) reload

2018-05-30 Thread William Dauchy
On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 5:29 PM, William Lallemand wrote: > I can reproduce the same situation there, however I disabled the seamless > reload. When doing a -USR1 & strace on an remaining worker, I can see that the > the signal is not blocked, and that it's still polling good news! >

Re: remaining process after (seamless) reload

2018-05-30 Thread Tim Düsterhus
William, Am 30.05.2018 um 19:45 schrieb William Lallemand: >> @William Lallemand Possibly the sd_notifyf should be moved below >> mworker_unblock_signals in mworker_wait? >> > > This shouldn't happen with or without systemd. I can reproduce it without > using systemd, we should not rely on an

Re: remaining process after (seamless) reload

2018-05-30 Thread William Lallemand
Hi Tim, On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 09:33:48PM +0200, Tim Düsterhus wrote: > > @William Lallemand Possibly the sd_notifyf should be moved below > mworker_unblock_signals in mworker_wait? > This shouldn't happen with or without systemd. I can reproduce it without using systemd, we should not rely

Re: BUG: ssl: regression with openssl 1.1.1 when using <= TLSv1.2

2018-05-30 Thread Lukas Tribus
Hello, On 22 May 2018 at 15:26, Lukas Tribus wrote: > Hello Emeric, > > > On 22 May 2018 at 14:44, Emeric Brun wrote: >> Hi Lukas, >> >> I've just made some tests using openssl-1.1.1-pre6 and can't reproduce the >> issue. >> >> here my simple configuration: >> frontend my >> mode http

Re: remaining process after (seamless) reload

2018-05-30 Thread William Lallemand
On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 04:47:31PM +0200, William Dauchy wrote: > Hello William L., > Hi William D. :-) > I did some more testing: > I simplified my config, removing the multi binding part and cpu-map. > Conclusion is, I have this issue when I activate nbthread feature > (meaning no probkem

Re: remaining process after (seamless) reload

2018-05-30 Thread William Dauchy
Hello William L., I did some more testing: I simplified my config, removing the multi binding part and cpu-map. Conclusion is, I have this issue when I activate nbthread feature (meaning no probkem without). I tried to kill -USR1 the failing worker, but it remains. Here are the Sig* from status

Re: haproxy=1.8.5 stuck in thread syncing

2018-05-30 Thread Christopher Faulet
Le 24/05/2018 à 10:28, Максим Куприянов a écrit : Could you tell if these patches will be backported to haproxy 1.8 or not? Hi, Sorry for the lag. Well, we are pretty busy these days. And this subject is unfortunately still in our todo-list. We definitely need to have a way to wake up

51Degrees Setup - Error reading 51Degrees data file.

2018-05-30 Thread Devendra Joshi
Hi, I am facing one issue while compiling haproxy-1.8.9 with 51Degrees Device-Detection module. When i start haproxy i am getting this error. [ALERT] 149/144015 (22611) : 51Degrees Setup - Error reading 51Degrees data file. Allocated continuous memory containing 51Degrees data file appears to

[ALERT] 149/143850 (22601) : 51Degrees Setup - Error reading 51Degrees data file.

2018-05-30 Thread Devendra Joshi
Hi, I am facing one issue while compiling haproxy-1.8.9 with 51Degrees Device-Detection module. When i start haproxy i am getting this error. [ALERT] 149/144015 (22611) : 51Degrees Setup - Error reading 51Degrees data file. Allocated continuous memory containing 51Degrees data file appears to be

Re: [PATCH 1/2] MEDIUM: add set-priority-class and set-priority-offset

2018-05-30 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 10:00:24AM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: > I noticed a strange effect which is that when injecting under low load with > a higher priority (either offset or class) than another high level traffic, > the response time on the higher priority traffic follows a sawtooth shape, >

Re: [PATCH 1/2] MEDIUM: add set-priority-class and set-priority-offset

2018-05-30 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Patrick, I'm finally back on this. On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 01:05:03AM -0400, Patrick Hemmer wrote: > On 2018/5/11 12:52, Patrick Hemmer wrote: > > This adds the set-priority-class and set-priority-offset actions to > > http-request and tcp-request content. > > The priority values are used

Re: [PATCH][MINOR] config: Implement 'parse-resolv-conf' directive for resolvers

2018-05-30 Thread Aleksandar Lazic
On 30/05/2018 05:20, Willy Tarreau wrote: On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 03:48:57PM -0600, Ben Draut wrote: [snipp] No problem, thanks for reviewing! Hopefully you guys get a break soon. Les vacances se rapprochent.. :) Holidays are the moment where it's easier to stay focused on complex stuff