Re: [PATCH] BUG/MEDIUM: email-alert: don't set server check status from a email-alert task

Hi Christopher, Willy, Op 7-12-2017 om 19:33 schreef Willy Tarreau: On Thu, Dec 07, 2017 at 04:27:16PM +0100, Christopher Faulet wrote: Honestly, I don't know which version is the best. Just let me know guys :-) imho Christopher's patch is smaller and probably easier to maintain and

Re: httpchk POST adding "Connection: close" after data

Hi Rahul, On Fri, Dec 08, 2017 at 12:00:51PM +0530, Rahul Ghanate wrote: > Hi, > > Here is the post I have added on discourse about the issue with httpchk > POST request, which you can find at, > https://discourse.haproxy.org/t/httpchk-post-adding-connection-close-after-data/1875 > The > content

Re: [PATCH] BUG/MEDIUM: email-alert: don't set server check status from a email-alert task

Hi Pieter, On Thu, Dec 07, 2017 at 11:02:13PM +0100, PiBa-NL wrote: > Made a new version of it with a bit of extra comments inside the code, > removed a unrelated white-space change, and added a matching patch > description. OK, now applied, thank you! Willy

Re: 1.8.1-fe66fd doesn't finish startup and doesn't listen to sockets

Hi Pavlos, On Thu, Dec 07, 2017 at 10:18:02PM +0100, Pavlos Parissis wrote: > On 07/12/2017 07:41 uu, Willy Tarreau wrote: > > It looks like it doesn't finish to startup in fact. Are you seeing it spin > > on the CPU maybe ? > > Yes, it does. I am sorry but I didn't notice it no pb. >

[PATCH] CONTRIB: log: emit warning when -sf/-sd cannot parse argument

Previously, -sf and -sd command line parsing used atol which cannot detect errors. I had a problem where I was doing -sf "$pid1 $pid2 $pid" and it was sending the gracefully terminate signal only to the first pid. The change uses strtol and checks endptr and errno to see if the parsing worked.

Re: 1.8.1-fe66fd doesn't finish startup and doesn't listen to sockets

On 07/12/2017 07:41 μμ, Willy Tarreau wrote: > Hi Pavlos! > > On Thu, Dec 07, 2017 at 07:16:54PM +0100, Pavlos Parissis wrote: >> Hi, >> >> OK, I haven't read the ML for ~2 weeks and a quick scan didn't reveal >> anything. >> So, here I am asking something that may have been addressed already.

Re: Segfault with 1.8.0 build (RHEL5, old gcc).

On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 4:36 AM, Olivier Houchard wrote: > Hi Christopher, > > On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 05:34:15PM -0800, Christopher Lane wrote: >> On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 11:56 AM, Christopher Lane >> wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > On Mon, Dec 4, 2017

Re: 1.8.1-fe66fd doesn't finish startup and doesn't listen to sockets

On 07/12/2017 10:18 μμ, Pavlos Parissis wrote: > On 07/12/2017 07:41 μμ, Willy Tarreau wrote: >> Hi Pavlos! >> >> On Thu, Dec 07, 2017 at 07:16:54PM +0100, Pavlos Parissis wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> OK, I haven't read the ML for ~2 weeks and a quick scan didn't reveal >>> anything. >>> So, here I am

Re: [PATCH] BUG/MEDIUM: email-alert: don't set server check status from a email-alert task

Hi Pieter, I'm CCing Christopher, he did some test on your patch. R, Emeric On 12/06/2017 07:06 AM, Willy Tarreau wrote: > Hi Pieter, > > CCing Emeric since these parts have changed a bit for threads and > there may be some subtle things we oversee. > > thanks for this! > Willy > > On Wed,

Re: Segfault with 1.8.0 build (RHEL5, old gcc).

Hi Christopher, On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 05:34:15PM -0800, Christopher Lane wrote: > On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 11:56 AM, Christopher Lane > wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 4:22 AM Lukas Tribus wrote: > > > >>Hello Christopher, > > > > >

What can cause RST from HAProxy 1.7.9

Thank you Joao for starting this thread, and Moemen for your reply. More information: 1) Something on the server side is sending RST packets to client initiated connections. 2) When it happens, all connections from a single IP address are reaped. However, it doesn't always happen to the same IP

Re: [PATCH 1/2] DOC: mworker: Update messages referencing exit-on-failure

Hi guys! On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 06:16:22PM +0100, Tim Düsterhus wrote: > William, > > Am 04.12.2017 um 16:09 schrieb William Lallemand: > > I prefer to leave this one, because otherwise the user won't understand why > > it > > killed the workers, and a grep on "exit-on-failure" in the

Re: MINOR: Add help text for -s switch in halog program

On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 12:46:13AM +, Aleksandar Lazic wrote: > Hi. > > Attached a small patch for halog against 1.8 repo witch also works against > 1.9 repo. Ah thank you Aleks, I've wanted to do it several times in the past and always forgot! Now applied. Willy

1.8.1-fe66fd doesn't finish startup and doesn't listen to sockets

Hi, OK, I haven't read the ML for ~2 weeks and a quick scan didn't reveal anything. So, here I am asking something that may have been addressed already. Today, I decided to switch my dev env to haproxy-1.8 using current master and I started haproxy in the same way as I have been doing with older

Re: [PATCH] BUG/MEDIUM: email-alert: don't set server check status from a email-alert task

On Thu, Dec 07, 2017 at 04:27:16PM +0100, Christopher Faulet wrote: > Honestly, I don't know which version is the best. Just let me know guys :-) > Email alerts should > probably be rewritten to not use the checks. This was the only solution to > do connections by hand when Simon implemented it.

Re: 1.8.1-fe66fd doesn't finish startup and doesn't listen to sockets

Hi Pavlos! On Thu, Dec 07, 2017 at 07:16:54PM +0100, Pavlos Parissis wrote: > Hi, > > OK, I haven't read the ML for ~2 weeks and a quick scan didn't reveal > anything. > So, here I am asking something that may have been addressed already. > > Today, I decided to switch my dev env to

Re: [PATCH] BUG: NetScaler CIP handling is incorrect

Hi Andreas, On Thu, Dec 07, 2017 at 02:41:29PM +0100, Andreas Mahnke wrote: > Hello everybody, > > Is there an update regarding the merging of the patch? We are thinking to > switch to version 1.8 in the near future and it would be nice to have the > patch merged, so that we do not need to merge

Quick update on pending HTTP/2 issues

Guys, just to warn you, there's currently an issue affecting HTTP/2 with POST payloads to "slow" servers. It's a bit difficult to explain but in short if haproxy's buffers fill up during the transfer, there's a risk that the wakeup event to restart decoding once the buffer is released cannot be