On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 01:56:29PM +0800, k simon wrote:
Hi,Willy,
I'm sorry about strace only support i386 on FreeBSD box, but I'm
working on amd64.
Argh! Without that we'll be fairly limited. You can try with truss
but we'll surely miss some information.
On a personal note, I'd say that
Le 16/04/2014 08:39, Willy Tarreau a écrit :
On a personal note, I'd say that I consider the support for strace and
tcpdump as absolute prerequisite when it comes to any platform going
into production, to the point of even reconsidering the platform if it
misses them. Willy
well FreeBSD
On 16 April 2014 13:41, Ghislain gad...@aqueos.com wrote:
Le 16/04/2014 08:39, Willy Tarreau a écrit :
On a personal note, I'd say that I consider the support for strace and
tcpdump as absolute prerequisite when it comes to any platform going into
production, to the point of even
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 02:32:03PM +0100, Simon Dick wrote:
On 16 April 2014 13:41, Ghislain gad...@aqueos.com wrote:
Le 16/04/2014 08:39, Willy Tarreau a écrit :
On a personal note, I'd say that I consider the support for strace and
tcpdump as absolute prerequisite when it comes to any
于 14-4-16 21:35, Willy Tarreau 写道:
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 02:32:03PM +0100, Simon Dick wrote:
On 16 April 2014 13:41, Ghislain gad...@aqueos.com wrote:
Le 16/04/2014 08:39, Willy Tarreau a écrit :
On a personal note, I'd say that I consider the support for strace and
tcpdump as absolute
Hi,List,
I got a 1.5 dev22 issue on freebsd 10-stable. It reported like below,
it's generate about 2-3 errors per minute when using http-keep-alive
,it's about 5-8 errors per minute with http-server-close. I tried use
source ip:port1-port2 in server section, but nothing helped. Then I
stop
Hi Simon,
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 04:22:35PM +0800, k simon wrote:
Hi,List,
I got a 1.5 dev22 issue on freebsd 10-stable. It reported like below,
it's generate about 2-3 errors per minute when using http-keep-alive
,it's about 5-8 errors per minute with http-server-close. I tried use
Hi,Willy,
Does your mean BUG/MINOR: tcpcheck connect wrong behavior or
BUG/MEDIUM: checks: immediately report a connection success ?
I have not used tcp-check, just used http-check. Does it have the
same bug? And the out connections to the server farm is about just
900+, is TW state
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 12:46:40AM +0800, k simon wrote:
Hi,Willy,
Does your mean BUG/MINOR: tcpcheck connect wrong behavior or
BUG/MEDIUM: checks: immediately report a connection success ?
I don't remember, all I can say is that whatever is tagged BUG must
be applied.
I have not used
Hi,Willy,
You must never have timewaits on a client, only on a server. So if
on your haproxy box you're seeing timewaits for connections going
to the backend servers, there's something wrong. Haproxy deploys
great efforts at avoiding them by doing a setsockopt(SO_LINGER) to
force the system
Hi Simon,
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 10:25:46AM +0800, k simon wrote:
Hi,Willy,
You must never have timewaits on a client, only on a server. So if
on your haproxy box you're seeing timewaits for connections going
to the backend servers, there's something wrong. Haproxy deploys
great
Hi,Willy,
I'm sorry about strace only support i386 on FreeBSD box, but I'm
working on amd64.
# uname -a
FreeBSD ha-l1-n2 10.0-STABLE FreeBSD 10.0-STABLE #0 r264098: Fri Apr 4
10:57:19 CST 2014
root@ha-l1-n2:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/10-stable-r264098 amd64
Simon
于 14-4-16 13:40, Willy
12 matches
Mail list logo
