On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 11:26 AM, Igor Cicimov <
ig...@encompasscorporation.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 11:08 AM, Igor Cicimov <
> ig...@encompasscorporation.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Martin,
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 6:55 PM, Martin RADEL <
>> martin.ra...@rbinternational.com> wrote:
>>
On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 11:08 AM, Igor Cicimov <
ig...@encompasscorporation.com> wrote:
> Hi Martin,
>
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 6:55 PM, Martin RADEL <
> martin.ra...@rbinternational.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>>
>>
>> we have a strange situation with our HAProxy, running on Version 1.8.8
>>
Hi Martin,
On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 6:55 PM, Martin RADEL <
martin.ra...@rbinternational.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
>
>
> we have a strange situation with our HAProxy, running on Version 1.8.8
> with OpenSSL.
>
> (See the details in the setup listed below - some lines are missing by
> intention.
I don't speak "Azure", but if they have something that claims to be a
load balancer, then "sure", just have to deal with stickiness issues and
of course the fact that you're load balancing load balancers.
(you likely need Application Gateway)
On 07/12/2018 05:50 PM, musafir wrote:
Hey Folks,
Hey Folks, is it possible to setup Haproxy 2 node active-active cluster
behind Azure Load Balancer i.e. (Azure LoadBalancer -> 2
Haproxy(ACTIVE-ACTIVE) -> WEBSERVERS). any suggestions?
On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 05:10:49PM +0200, Baptiste wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This patch adds a new keyword "resolve-opts" which can take a list of comma
> separated options.
(...)
applied, thank you Baptiste.
Willy
On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 11:05:30AM +0200, Frederic Lecaille wrote:
> This is a patch to fix the issue reported by Ilya Shipitsin in this thread.
Applied, thank you Fred.
Willy
On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 05:38:34PM +0200, William Lallemand wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 04:42:01PM +0200, Vincent Bernat wrote:
> > ? 12 juillet 2018 16:25 +0200, William Lallemand :
> >
> > > Maybe we could take your first patch for the unit file and backport it in
> > > 1.8,
> > > and
On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 04:42:01PM +0200, Vincent Bernat wrote:
> ❦ 12 juillet 2018 16:25 +0200, William Lallemand :
>
> > Maybe we could take your first patch for the unit file and backport it in
> > 1.8,
> > and then make the appropriate changes for 1.9 once the master was
> > redesigned.
>
Hi all,
This patch adds a new keyword "resolve-opts" which can take a list of comma
separated options.
2 options have been implemented for now:
* prevent-dup-ip: (default and historical way of working for HAProxy)
ensure this server will be the single one configured to an IP address, when
sharing
❦ 12 juillet 2018 16:25 +0200, William Lallemand :
> Maybe we could take your first patch for the unit file and backport it in 1.8,
> and then make the appropriate changes for 1.9 once the master was
> redesigned.
Yes, no problem. The first patch should apply without any change on 1.8.
I am
Thanks for the update. We will see what we can do, and I appreciate your help!
Jim
From: Baptiste
Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2018 8:59:53 AM
To: Jim Deville
Cc: haproxy@formilux.org; Jonathan Works
Subject: Re: Issue with parsing DNS from AWS
Hi Jim,
"hold
On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 04:14:34PM +0200, Vincent Bernat wrote:
> ❦ 22 juin 2018 22:03 +0200, Vincent Bernat :
>
> > Without this patch, when killing the master process, the SIGTERM
> > signal is forwarded to all children. Last children will likely exit
> > with "killed by signal SIGTERM"
❦ 22 juin 2018 22:03 +0200, Vincent Bernat :
> Without this patch, when killing the master process, the SIGTERM
> signal is forwarded to all children. Last children will likely exit
> with "killed by signal SIGTERM" status which would be converted by an
> exit with status 143 of the master
Hi Jim,
"hold obsolete" defaults to 0, so basically, HAProxy may evince servers
from your backend quite frequently (the bigger the farm, the more chance it
happens).
Furthermore, most of those changes are "false positive" (since the server
may still be healthy).
DNS over TCP won't help.
As I
Hi Sven,
Thanks for the clarification.
It's a bit more complicated than what it is supposed to be.
I think we may want to apply the port only if it has been changed at
runtime (changed by DNS SRV records).
The status is the following: I have a pending patch which brings SRV record
information
On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 02:54:43PM +0500, Илья Шипицин wrote:
> hello,
>
Hello,
> I have the following suggestion
>
> 1) I will add .gitlab-ci.yml to the haproxy repo (it will include "centos
> 7" and "fedora 28" builds, just to cover openssl-1.0.2 and openssl-1.1.0)
>
It could be a better
hello,
I have the following suggestion
1) I will add .gitlab-ci.yml to the haproxy repo (it will include "centos
7" and "fedora 28" builds, just to cover openssl-1.0.2 and openssl-1.1.0)
2) that .gitlab-ci.yml will run reg tests
3) anyone can follow to https://gitlab.com --> new --> CI for
This is a patch to fix the issue reported by Ilya Shipitsin in this thread.
Fred.
>From 47ca7696d0ccca5989929940db323e9e9255ae4a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: =?UTF-8?q?Fr=C3=A9d=C3=A9ric=20L=C3=A9caille?=
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2018 10:48:06 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] REGTEST/MINOR: Wrong URI syntax.
Hi all,
we have a strange situation with our HAProxy, running on Version 1.8.8 with
OpenSSL.
(See the details in the setup listed below - some lines are missing by
intention. It's a config snippet with just the interesting parts mentioned)
Initial situation:
We run a HAProxy instance which
yes, it fixed build:
https://gitlab.com/chipitsine/haproxy/-/jobs/81225803
чт, 12 июл. 2018 г. в 13:28, Frederic Lecaille :
> On 07/11/2018 09:12 PM, Илья Шипицин wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I'm playing with reg tests. Sometimes they fail for weird reasons.
> > (for example, fedora 28 on gitlab
On 07/11/2018 09:12 PM, Илья Шипицин wrote:
Hello,
I'm playing with reg tests. Sometimes they fail for weird reasons.
(for example, fedora 28 on gitlab ci)
https://gitlab.com/chipitsine/haproxy/-/jobs/81106855
curl -i -k https://${h1_frt_addr}:${h1_frt_port}
became
curl -i -k
22 matches
Mail list logo
