Re: [PATCH] CI: Replace the requirement for 'sudo' with a call to 'ulimit -n'

Willy, On 6/13/21 3:02 PM, Tim Duesterhus wrote: Using 'sudo' required quite a few workarounds in various places. Setting an explicit 'ulimit -n' removes the requirement for 'sudo', resulting in a cleaner workflow configuration. You might've missed this one. Ilya already acked it and I tested

Re: [PATCH] CI: Replace the requirement for 'sudo' with a call to 'ulimit -n'

On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 12:31:45PM +0200, Tim Düsterhus wrote: > Willy, > > On 6/13/21 3:02 PM, Tim Duesterhus wrote: > > Using 'sudo' required quite a few workarounds in various places. Setting an > > explicit 'ulimit -n' removes the requirement for 'sudo', resulting in a > > cleaner > >

Re: Speeding up opentracing build in CI ?

Willy, On 6/17/21 4:39 PM, Willy Tarreau wrote: Ah indeed. Well, it even suffers variations that are larger than the potential savings, ranging from 10'45 to 15'00 over the last few builds. So we don't really know how much we're saving, we can only hope it saves a little bit. To clarify:

Re: Speeding up opentracing build in CI ?

On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 04:31:57PM +0200, Tim Düsterhus wrote: > Willy, William, > > On 6/17/21 3:55 PM, William Lallemand wrote: > > > OK that's a net win, openssl-3.0.0-alpha17 dropped from 8'29 to 2'55. > > > I've just excluded versions 1.x from both the parallel build and the > > > build_sw

Re: [PATCH 0/4] Use 'feature cmd' in regtests

On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 07:56:14PM +0200, Tim Duesterhus wrote: > This series updates the regtests to make use of VTest's 'feature cmd' syntax > to skip tests that are not supported in the current environment. (...) Whole series merged, thanks Tim. I feel like the selection is slightly faster

Re: Speeding up opentracing build in CI ?

On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 03:53:10PM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: > Subject: Re: Speeding up opentracing build in CI ? > > On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 03:29:58PM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 03:24:19PM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 08:55:13PM +0500,

Re: Speeding up opentracing build in CI ?

On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 03:24:19PM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: > On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 08:55:13PM +0500, ??? wrote: > > I was mistaken. LibreSSL does not like parallel install > > > > libressl fails on `make -j4 install` · Issue #461 · > > libressl-portable/portable (github.com) > >

Re: [PATCH] CLEANUP: server: a separate function for initializing the per_thr field

Hi Miroslav, On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 03:53:39PM +0200, Miroslav Zagorac wrote: > Hello all, > > To avoid repeating the same source code, allocating memory and > initializing the per_thr field from the server structure is > transferred to a separate function. Makes sense, indeed. Now merged,

Re: Speeding up opentracing build in CI ?

чт, 17 июн. 2021 г. в 19:39, Willy Tarreau : > On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 04:31:57PM +0200, Tim Düsterhus wrote: > > Willy, William, > > > > On 6/17/21 3:55 PM, William Lallemand wrote: > > > > OK that's a net win, openssl-3.0.0-alpha17 dropped from 8'29 to 2'55. > > > > I've just excluded versions

Re: Speeding up opentracing build in CI ?

On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 08:55:13PM +0500, ??? wrote: > I was mistaken. LibreSSL does not like parallel install > > libressl fails on `make -j4 install` · Issue #461 · > libressl-portable/portable (github.com) > > > > anyway, if

Re: Speeding up opentracing build in CI ?

Willy, William, On 6/17/21 3:55 PM, William Lallemand wrote: OK that's a net win, openssl-3.0.0-alpha17 dropped from 8'29 to 2'55. I've just excluded versions 1.x from both the parallel build and the build_sw target and that's good now. Willy Great improvement, thanks! Here's a full

Re: [PATCH 0/4] Use 'feature cmd' in regtests

On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 05:03:23PM +0200, Tim Düsterhus wrote: > On 6/17/21 3:27 PM, Willy Tarreau wrote: > > Whole series merged, thanks Tim. I feel like the selection is slightly > > faster than before, but that might just be a placebo effect. > > > > I would assume that it's slightly slower,

Re: Speeding up opentracing build in CI ?

On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 03:29:58PM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: > On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 03:24:19PM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 08:55:13PM +0500, ??? wrote: > > > I was mistaken. LibreSSL does not like parallel install > > > > > > libressl fails on `make -j4

Re: [PATCH] CI: Replace the requirement for 'sudo' with a call to 'ulimit -n'

Hi Tim, On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 12:31:45PM +0200, Tim Düsterhus wrote: > Willy, > > On 6/13/21 3:02 PM, Tim Duesterhus wrote: > > Using 'sudo' required quite a few workarounds in various places. Setting an > > explicit 'ulimit -n' removes the requirement for 'sudo', resulting in a > > cleaner >

Re: [PATCH 0/4] Use 'feature cmd' in regtests

Willy, [clearing CC list] On 6/17/21 3:27 PM, Willy Tarreau wrote: Whole series merged, thanks Tim. I feel like the selection is slightly faster than before, but that might just be a placebo effect. I would assume that it's slightly slower, because we need to launch more executables

Re: Speeding up opentracing build in CI ?

On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 04:48:45PM +0200, Tim Düsterhus wrote: > To clarify: This specific timing also includes the wait times until the > build VMs are available. It's basically the wall time elapsed between the > push happening and the *last* build reporting the status. So the time the >

Re: [PATCH] typo fixes

On Sat, Jun 12, 2021 at 03:57:40PM +0500, ??? wrote: > Hello, > > yet more typo and spelling fixes. Merged, thank you Ilya! Willy

Re: SSL Labs says my server isn't doing ssl session resumption

On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 06:48:09PM -0600, Shawn Heisey wrote: > I'm fiddling with ssl labs to see how I can improve my TLS setup. > > Here's what they say about a site I have behind haproxy with TLS: > > https://www.elyograg.org/foo/haproxy-ssllabs-session-resumption-not-working.png > > They

[ANNOUNCE] haproxy-2.4.1

Hi, HAProxy 2.4.1 was released on 2021/06/17. It added 73 new commits after version 2.4.0. Overall, we've had a few very minor regressions in 2.4 for now. One of them is the closure without error response when http-ignore-probes is set and a bad request is received, and the few other ones were