Re: reg-tests situation in haproxy 1.8

2019-01-18 Thread Willy Tarreau
Hi Lukas, On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 12:43:34PM +0100, Lukas Tribus wrote: > Hello, > > > currently we have 4 reg-tests in haproxy-1.8, backported due to the > actual bugfix commit, which included a test. We also have a broken > symbolic link in reg-tests/lua/common.pem, which causes at least some

Re: haproxy issue tracker discussion

2019-01-18 Thread Aleksandar Lazic
Cool, thanks :-) Ursprüngliche Nachricht Von: Lukas Tribus Gesendet: 18. Jänner 2019 14:14:06 MEZ An: Aleksandar Lazic CC: haproxy , Willy Tarreau , "Tim Düsterhus" Betreff: Re: haproxy issue tracker discussion Hello Aleksandar, On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 at 12:54, Aleksandar

Re: HTX & tune.maxrewrite [1.9.2]

2019-01-18 Thread Christopher Faulet
Le 18/01/2019 à 14:23, Luke Seelenbinder a écrit : Quick clarification on the previous message. The code emitting the warning is almost assuredly here: https://github.com/haproxy/haproxy/blob/ed7a066b454f09fee07a9ffe480407884496461b/src/proto_htx.c#L3242 not in proto_http.c, seeing how this

Re: HAProxy compilation issue

2019-01-18 Thread Olivier D
Hello, Le sam. 12 janv. 2019 à 13:19, Willy Tarreau a écrit : > Hi Olivier, > > On Wed, Jan 09, 2019 at 07:23:42PM +0100, Olivier D wrote: > > Hello folks, > > > > Just wanted to raise an issue with a compilation error on HAProxy that I > > was able to solve by myself. Just wanted to know if

[PATCH 1/1] REGTEST: Peers reg tests.

2019-01-18 Thread flecaille
This is a better patch to update only reg-tests/peers/s_tls_basic_sync.vtc: We add a 4th haproxy process seen as peer D, without any encryption enabled for all the four peers A,B,C and D. On the three first haproxy instances side A,B, C, we declare D with ssl/tls activated. Consequently D cannot

[PATCH] REGTEST: Peers reg tests.

2019-01-18 Thread flecaille
From: Frédéric Lécaille --- reg-tests/peers/common.pem | 1 + reg-tests/peers/s_basic_sync.vtc | 115 +++ reg-tests/peers/s_tls_basic_sync.vtc | 150 +++ 3 files changed, 266 insertions(+) create mode 12

Re: HTX & tune.maxrewrite [1.9.2]

2019-01-18 Thread Luke Seelenbinder
Quick clarification on the previous message. The code emitting the warning is almost assuredly here: https://github.com/haproxy/haproxy/blob/ed7a066b454f09fee07a9ffe480407884496461b/src/proto_htx.c#L3242 not in proto_http.c, seeing how this is in htx mode not http mode. I've traced the issue

Re: haproxy issue tracker discussion

2019-01-18 Thread Lukas Tribus
Hello Aleksandar, On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 at 12:54, Aleksandar Lazic wrote: > > Hi. > > As there are now the github templates in the repo can / should we start to > create issues & features on github? Yes, you can go ahead and start filing bugs and features. There's some minor tweaking yet to

Re: error while extracting 1.8.17 tar file

2019-01-18 Thread Lukas Tribus
Hello Girish, On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 01:53, Monitoring Naaptol wrote: > > Hi > > we are getting error while extracting tar file 1.8.17 on windows This is a symbolic link, and Windows does not support symbolic links, which is why extracting that particular file on that OS fails. I suggest you

HTX & tune.maxrewrite [1.9.2]

2019-01-18 Thread Luke Seelenbinder
Hello all, I just rolled out 1.9.2 compiled from the official tarball to a subset of our servers, and I'm observing some odd behavior in the logs. I'm seeing the following warning (with accompanying warnings about failed hdr rewrites in the stats page): Proxy foo failed to add or set the

Re: haproxy issue tracker discussion

2019-01-18 Thread Aleksandar Lazic
Hi. As there are now the github templates in the repo can / should we start to create issues & features on github? Regards Aleks Ursprüngliche Nachricht Von: Willy Tarreau Gesendet: 14. Jänner 2019 04:11:17 MEZ An: "Tim Düsterhus" CC: Lukas Tribus , haproxy Betreff: Re:

reg-tests situation in haproxy 1.8

2019-01-18 Thread Lukas Tribus
Hello, currently we have 4 reg-tests in haproxy-1.8, backported due to the actual bugfix commit, which included a test. We also have a broken symbolic link in reg-tests/lua/common.pem, which causes at least some confusion [1]. We don't have any test infrastructure in haproxy-1.8 (Makefile,

Re: [ANNOUNCE] haproxy-1.9.2

2019-01-18 Thread Aleksandar Lazic
Hi Willy, Am 17-01-2019 15:41, schrieb Willy Tarreau: Hi Aleks, On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 01:02:56PM +0100, Aleksandar Lazic wrote: > Very likely, yes. If you want to inspect the body you simply have to > enable "option http-buffer-request" so that haproxy waits for the body > before executing