Great! Initial tests shows that only one connection was established and
closed once.
The behavior is as follows:
telnet and a manual GET: Connection to haproxy and a connection to server
(port 2004).
Run ab: New connection to haproxy, reuse the same connection (Port 2004) to
server.
'ab' fin
On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 07:44:45AM +0530, Krishna Kumar (Engineering) wrote:
> Great, will be glad to test and report on the finding. Thanks!
Sorry I forgot to post the patch after committing it. Here it comes.
Regarding the second point, in the end it's not a bug, it's simply
because we don't hav
Great, will be glad to test and report on the finding. Thanks!
Regards,
- Krishna
On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 9:07 PM, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> Hi Krishna,
>
> I found a bug explaining your observations and noticed a second one I have
> not yet troubleshooted.
>
> The bug causing your issue is that be
Hi Krishna,
I found a bug explaining your observations and noticed a second one I have
not yet troubleshooted.
The bug causing your issue is that before moving the idle connection back to
the server's pool, we check the backend's http-reuse mode. But we're doing
this after calling http_reset_txn(
Thanks a lot, Willy.
Regards,
- Krishna
On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> Hi Krishna,
>
> On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 08:31:19AM +0530, Krishna Kumar (Engineering)
> wrote:
> > Hi Willy, Baptiste,
> >
> > Apologies for the delay in reproducing this issue and in responding.
> >
Hi Krishna,
On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 08:31:19AM +0530, Krishna Kumar (Engineering) wrote:
> Hi Willy, Baptiste,
>
> Apologies for the delay in reproducing this issue and in responding.
>
> I am using HAProxy 1.6.2 and am still finding that connection reuse is not
> happening in my setup. Attachin
Hi Willy, Baptiste,
Apologies for the delay in reproducing this issue and in responding.
I am using HAProxy 1.6.2 and am still finding that connection reuse is not
happening in my setup. Attaching the configuration file, command line
arguments, and the tcpdump (80 packets in all), in case it help
Hi Krishna,
On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 03:22:54PM +0530, Krishna Kumar (Engineering) wrote:
> I just tested with 128K byte file (run 4 wgets
> in parallel each retrieving 128K). Here, I see 4 connections being opened, and
> lots of data packets in the middle, finally followed by 4 connections
> being
Hi Willy,
>> B. Run 8 wgets in parallel. Each opens a new connection to get a 128 byte
>> file.
>> Again, 8 separate connections are opened to the backend server.
>
> But are they *really* processed in parallel ? If the file is only 128 bytes,
> I can easily imagine that the connections are
Hi Krishna,
On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 12:31:42PM +0530, Krishna Kumar (Engineering) wrote:
> Thanks Baptiste. My configuration file is very basic:
>
> global
> maxconn 100
> defaults
> mode http
> option http-keep-alive
> option splice-response
> option clitcpka
>
Thanks Baptiste. My configuration file is very basic:
global
maxconn 100
defaults
mode http
option http-keep-alive
option splice-response
option clitcpka
option srvtcpka
option tcp-smart-accept
option tcp-smart-connect
timeout connect 6
On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 11:44 AM, Krishna Kumar (Engineering)
wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> I am comparing 1.6.1 with 1.5.12. Following are the relevant snippets from the
> configuration file:
>
> global
>maxconn 100
> defaults
>option http-keep-alive
>option clitcpka
Dear all,
I am comparing 1.6.1 with 1.5.12. Following are the relevant snippets from the
configuration file:
global
maxconn 100
defaults
option http-keep-alive
option clitcpka
option srvtcpka
frontend private-frontend
maxconn 100
m
13 matches
Mail list logo