Re: Anyone heard about DPDK?
Something like http://seastar.io/ or https://fd.io/ ? :) On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 11:25 AM Baptiste wrote: > Hi, > > HAProxy requires a TCP stack below it. DPDK itself is not enough. > > Baptiste > >>
Re: [PATCH] ssl: factoring load cert/key and chains
On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 12:24 PM Emmanuel Hocdet wrote: > > Hi, > > I tried to improve the haproxy loading time with a lot of certificates, > and see a double file > open for each certificate (one for private-key and one for the cert/chain). > Multi-cert loading part have not this issue and is good candidate for > sharing code: > patches is this work with factoring/cleanup/fix. > > About speed: PEM file with private key in first position is far better. > > If you can consider this patches? > > ++ > Manu > > Hello, I'm curious, do you have numbers concerning the open(2) optimization ? And also the PEM ordering, I did not know it mattered. Regards, Julien
Re: Removed health check in combination with load-server-state-from-file (Bug)
On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 11:18 AM, Cyril Bonté wrote: > Isn't the state file part of the configuration? :-) > yes it is. it is also part of the previous working configuration.
Re: Removed health check in combination with load-server-state-from-file (Bug)
On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 10:38 AM, Cyril Bonté wrote: > Well health checks or not, the state file reflects the state you want. > You can absolutely imagine cases where health checks were never activated, > and someone used the CLI to set a server DOWN. If you save the servers > state and reload haproxy, You'd certainly want to have that server still > DOWN (which is a different state than DOWN for maintenance, the one set by > the "disabled" keyword). Hello Cyril, Well, you can also think of this use case which I find legit: - you don't have probe - you want to have probe so you add one and reload haproxy - you realize your probe does not do want you intended, your backends are turning down - you panic, you decide to rollback to the previous working configuration and reload haproxy - it still does not work - you panic :) How can we make this rollback-to-previous-configuration works in this case ? Regards, Julien
Re: Removed health check in combination with load-server-state-from-file (Bug)
Hello, I am experiencing the same problem. Is this the expected behaviour ? Or is it a bug ? Regards, Julien On Sat, Aug 26, 2017 at 2:55 AM, Tim Düsterhus wrote: > Hi > > as I did not receive any reply at all to my email from Aug 13 I thought > I resend it (Quoted below). Can anyone at least verify that my bug > report is valid? :-) > > Tim > > Am 13.08.2017 um 13:19 schrieb Tim Düsterhus: > > Hi > > > > I run haproxy with 'load-server-state-from-file'. Before reloading > > haproxy I dump the state using: > > > > echo show servers state |nc -U admin.sock > /etc/haproxy/state/global > > > > I noticed a buggy behaviour with this: > > > > 1. Check that the backend is 'DOWN'. > > 2. Dump the state using the command above (the 'DOWN' state is written > > into the file). > > 3. Remove the health check of the backend. > > 4. Reload haproxy. > > 5. The backend will now be 'DOWN' forever, as the initial state taken > > from the file is 'DOWN' and no health checks are running. > > > > I attached an example configuration and an example state file. To > > reproduce the issue: > > > > 1. Start haproxy. > > 2. Open the Stats page. > > 3. Place the state file. > > 4. Remove the 'check' from the configuration. > > 5. Reload haproxy. > > 6. Start the backend. > > 7. Reload the Stats page and notice that the backend still is 'DOWN'. > > > > Tim > > > >
