,
On Fri, Mar 06, 2009 at 03:54:13PM -0500, Greg Gard wrote:
hi willy and all,
wondering if i can expect haproxy to queue requests when max conn per
backend it set to 1. running nginx haproxy mongrel/rails2.2.2.
yes, it works fine and is even the recommended way of setting it for
use
--
greg gard, psyd
www.carepaths.com
at 04:14:02PM -0400, Greg Gard wrote:
hi,
we run 1.13.5 and have been very happy for the most part
I think you meant 1.3.15. Please check then that it's a recent 1.3.15.X,
eg 1.3.15.10.
lately our
traffic has increased and we are now getting more 500 errors. not sure
what the cause
...@1wt.eu wrote:
Hi Greg,
On Thu, Oct 08, 2009 at 09:56:37PM -0400, Greg Gard wrote:
hi all,
i have been watching this thread with some interest and had a comment
about mongrel and health checks. i have found that i can have mongrel
serve up a static file as a health check that uses a separate
=linux26 USE_PCRE=1 USE_STATIC_PCRE=1
i noticed in the makefile that regparm is recommended on x86, and i
was unaware of the -g option described in an earlier email to this
list today.
anyway, what are the preferred options for production machines?
...gg
--
greg gard, psyd
www.carepaths.com
as debian doen't keep pace with updates and
i like to upgrade without nuking the old known good setup.
anyway, thanks...gg
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 4:42 PM, Aleksandar Lazic al-hapr...@none.at wrote:
On Mit 14.10.2009 16:21, Greg Gard wrote:
hi all,
i recently started building haproxy
pause all
traffic so that all requests are queued for say a minute while i do
what i need to and then resume traffic.
is there a way to do this?
great work willy and friends. haproxy brings home the bacon every day...gg
--
greg gard, psyd
www.carepaths.com
my experience if i remove all the healthcheck
files, then haproxy skips the queue and starts returning 5xx (no
servers available) errors right away which defeats the purpose.
On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 11:12 PM, David Birdsong
david.birds...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 7:50 PM, Greg Gard
...@1wt.eu wrote:
On Fri, Feb 05, 2010 at 11:43:31PM -0500, Greg Gard wrote:
hi,
thanks for the idea and i too use a static healthcheck file, though i
have been burned a few times when mongrel dished up the file, but
rails was in fact hung so am going to go back to rails method as soon
as i can get
and choppy connectivity.
thanks...gg
--
greg gard, psyd
www.carepaths.com
, thanks for clarifying that i wasn't missing some
simple config option.
...gg
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 6:24 PM, Willy Tarreau w...@1wt.eu wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 10:54:35PM +0100, XANi wrote:
Dnia 2010-02-25, czw o godzinie 16:27 -0500, Greg Gard pisze:
hi willy and friends,
i
connection to a mongrel
at a time. if health checks are independent of client requests there
are bound to be collisions.
suggestions?
thanks...gg
--
greg gard, psyd
www.carepaths.com
as part of the solution.
just to be complete, are there any plans to have health checks get queued?
On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 8:14 AM, Holger Just w...@meine-er.de wrote:
Hi Greg,
On 2010-03-20 6:52 AM, Greg Gard wrote:
i remember somewhere in the archives mention of a plan to make health
checks
...@1wt.eu wrote:
On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 12:05:16AM -0400, Greg Gard wrote:
thanks holger,
i did some research and was able to find more on mongrel and queuing.
so that helps to clarify. i am unsure what i will do viz checking in
the end as we have some long running requests that are frankly
14 matches
Mail list logo
