441 lines
21 KiB
Plaintext
441 lines
21 KiB
Plaintext
----------------------
|
|
HAProxy how-to
|
|
----------------------
|
|
version 1.5-dev11
|
|
willy tarreau
|
|
2012/06/04
|
|
|
|
|
|
1) How to build it
|
|
------------------
|
|
|
|
To build haproxy, you will need :
|
|
- GNU make. Neither Solaris nor OpenBSD's make work with the GNU Makefile.
|
|
However, specific Makefiles for BSD and OSX are provided.
|
|
- GCC between 2.91 and 4.5.0. Others may work, but not tested.
|
|
- GNU ld
|
|
|
|
Also, you might want to build with libpcre support, which will provide a very
|
|
efficient regex implementation and will also fix some badness on Solaris' one.
|
|
|
|
To build haproxy, you have to choose your target OS amongst the following ones
|
|
and assign it to the TARGET variable :
|
|
|
|
- linux22 for Linux 2.2
|
|
- linux24 for Linux 2.4 and above (default)
|
|
- linux24e for Linux 2.4 with support for a working epoll (> 0.21)
|
|
- linux26 for Linux 2.6 and above
|
|
- linux2628 for Linux 2.6.28 and above (enables splice and tproxy)
|
|
- solaris for Solaris 8 or 10 (others untested)
|
|
- freebsd for FreeBSD 5 to 8.0 (others untested)
|
|
- openbsd for OpenBSD 3.1 to 4.6 (others untested)
|
|
- aix52 for AIX 5.2
|
|
- cygwin for Cygwin
|
|
- generic for any other OS.
|
|
- custom to manually adjust every setting
|
|
|
|
You may also choose your CPU to benefit from some optimizations. This is
|
|
particularly important on UltraSparc machines. For this, you can assign
|
|
one of the following choices to the CPU variable :
|
|
|
|
- i686 for intel PentiumPro, Pentium 2 and above, AMD Athlon
|
|
- i586 for intel Pentium, AMD K6, VIA C3.
|
|
- ultrasparc : Sun UltraSparc I/II/III/IV processor
|
|
- native : use the build machine's specific processor optimizations
|
|
- generic : any other processor or no specific optimization. (default)
|
|
|
|
Alternatively, you may just set the CPU_CFLAGS value to the optimal GCC options
|
|
for your platform.
|
|
|
|
You may want to build specific target binaries which do not match your native
|
|
compiler's target. This is particularly true on 64-bit systems when you want
|
|
to build a 32-bit binary. Use the ARCH variable for this purpose. Right now
|
|
it only knows about a few x86 variants (i386,i486,i586,i686,x86_64), two
|
|
generic ones (32,64) and sets -m32/-m64 as well as -march=<arch> accordingly.
|
|
|
|
If your system supports PCRE (Perl Compatible Regular Expressions), then you
|
|
really should build with libpcre which is between 2 and 10 times faster than
|
|
other libc implementations. Regex are used for header processing (deletion,
|
|
rewriting, allow, deny). The only inconvenient of libpcre is that it is not
|
|
yet widely spread, so if you build for other systems, you might get into
|
|
trouble if they don't have the dynamic library. In this situation, you should
|
|
statically link libpcre into haproxy so that it will not be necessary to
|
|
install it on target systems. Available build options for PCRE are :
|
|
|
|
- USE_PCRE=1 to use libpcre, in whatever form is available on your system
|
|
(shared or static)
|
|
|
|
- USE_STATIC_PCRE=1 to use a static version of libpcre even if the dynamic
|
|
one is available. This will enhance portability.
|
|
|
|
- with no option, use your OS libc's standard regex implemntation (default).
|
|
Warning! group references on Solaris seem broken. Use static-pcre whenever
|
|
possible.
|
|
|
|
Recent systems can resolve IPv6 host names using getaddrinfo(). This primitive
|
|
is not present in all libcs and does not work in all of them either. Support in
|
|
glibc was broken before 2.3. Some embedded libs may not properly work either,
|
|
thus, support is disabled by default, meaning that some host names which only
|
|
resolve as IPv6 addresses will not resolve and configs might emit an error
|
|
during parsing. If you know that your OS libc has reliable support for
|
|
getaddrinfo(), you can add USE_GETADDRINFO=1 on the make command line to enable
|
|
it. This is the recommended option for most Linux distro packagers since it's
|
|
working fine on all recent mainstream distros. It is automatically enabled on
|
|
Solaris 8 and above, as it's known to work.
|
|
|
|
By default, the DEBUG variable is set to '-g' to enable debug symbols. It is
|
|
not wise to disable it on uncommon systems, because it's often the only way to
|
|
get a complete core when you need one. Otherwise, you can set DEBUG to '-s' to
|
|
strip the binary.
|
|
|
|
For example, I use this to build for Solaris 8 :
|
|
|
|
$ make TARGET=solaris CPU=ultrasparc USE_STATIC_PCRE=1
|
|
|
|
And I build it this way on OpenBSD or FreeBSD :
|
|
|
|
$ make -f Makefile.bsd REGEX=pcre DEBUG= COPTS.generic="-Os -fomit-frame-pointer -mgnu"
|
|
|
|
In order to build a 32-bit binary on an x86_64 Linux system :
|
|
|
|
$ make TARGET=linux26 ARCH=i386
|
|
|
|
If you need to pass other defines, includes, libraries, etc... then please
|
|
check the Makefile to see which ones will be available in your case, and
|
|
use the USE_* variables in the GNU Makefile, or ADDINC, ADDLIB, and DEFINE
|
|
variables in the BSD makefiles.
|
|
|
|
AIX 5.3 is known to work with the generic target. However, for the binary to
|
|
also run on 5.2 or earlier, you need to build with DEFINE="-D_MSGQSUPPORT",
|
|
otherwise __fd_select() will be used while not being present in the libc.
|
|
If you get build errors because of strange symbols or section mismatches,
|
|
simply remove -g from DEBUG_CFLAGS.
|
|
|
|
|
|
2) How to install it
|
|
--------------------
|
|
|
|
To install haproxy, you can either copy the single resulting binary to the
|
|
place you want, or run :
|
|
|
|
$ sudo make install
|
|
|
|
If you're packaging it for another system, you can specify its root directory
|
|
in the usual DESTDIR variable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
3) How to set it up
|
|
-------------------
|
|
|
|
There is some documentation in the doc/ directory :
|
|
|
|
- architecture.txt : this is the architecture manual. It is quite old and
|
|
does not tell about the nice new features, but it's still a good starting
|
|
point when you know what you want but don't know how to do it.
|
|
|
|
- configuration.txt : this is the configuration manual. It recalls a few
|
|
essential HTTP basic concepts, and details all the configuration file
|
|
syntax (keywords, units). It also describes the log and stats format. It
|
|
is normally always up to date. If you see that something is missing from
|
|
it, please report it as this is a bug.
|
|
|
|
- haproxy-en.txt / haproxy-fr.txt : these are the old outdated docs. You
|
|
should never need them. If you do, then please report what you didn't
|
|
find in the other ones.
|
|
|
|
- gpl.txt / lgpl.txt : the copy of the licenses covering the software. See
|
|
the 'LICENSE' file at the top for more information.
|
|
|
|
- the rest is mainly for developers.
|
|
|
|
There are also a number of nice configuration examples in the "examples"
|
|
directory as well as on several sites and articles on the net which are linked
|
|
to from the haproxy web site.
|
|
|
|
|
|
4) How to report a bug
|
|
----------------------
|
|
|
|
It is possible that from time to time you'll find a bug. A bug is a case where
|
|
what you see is not what is documented. Otherwise it can be a misdesign. If you
|
|
find that something is stupidly design, please discuss it on the list (see the
|
|
"how to contribute" section below). If you feel like you're proceeding right
|
|
and haproxy doesn't obey, then first ask yourself if it is possible that nobody
|
|
before you has even encountered this issue. If it's unlikely, the you probably
|
|
have an issue in your setup. Just in case of doubt, please consult the mailing
|
|
list archives :
|
|
|
|
http://www.formilux.org/archives/haproxy/
|
|
http://marc.info/?l=haproxy
|
|
|
|
Otherwise, please try to gather the maximum amount of information to help
|
|
reproduce the issue and send that to the mailing list :
|
|
|
|
haproxy@formilux.org
|
|
|
|
Please include your configuration and logs. You can mask your IP addresses and
|
|
passwords, we don't need them. But it's essential that you post your config if
|
|
you want people to guess what is happening.
|
|
|
|
Also, keep in mind that haproxy is designed to NEVER CRASH. If you see it die
|
|
without any reason, then it definitely is a critical bug that must be reported
|
|
and urgently fixed. It has happened a couple of times in the past, essentially
|
|
on development versions running on new architectures. If you think your setup
|
|
is fairly common, then it is possible that the issue is totally unrelated.
|
|
Anyway, if that happens, feel free to contact me directly, as I will give you
|
|
instructions on how to collect a usable core file, and will probably ask for
|
|
other captures that you'll not want to share with the list.
|
|
|
|
|
|
5) How to contribute
|
|
--------------------
|
|
|
|
It is possible that you'll want to add a specific feature to satisfy your needs
|
|
or one of your customers'. Contributions are welcome, however I'm often very
|
|
picky about changes. I will generally reject patches that change massive parts
|
|
of the code, or that touch the core parts without any good reason if those
|
|
changes have not been discussed first.
|
|
|
|
The proper place to discuss your changes is the HAProxy Mailing List. There are
|
|
enough skilled readers to catch hazardous mistakes and to suggest improvements.
|
|
I trust a number of them enough to merge a patch if they say it's OK, so using
|
|
the list is the fastest way to get your code reviewed and merged. You can
|
|
subscribe to it by sending an empty e-mail at the following address :
|
|
|
|
haproxy+subscribe@formilux.org
|
|
|
|
If you have an idea about something to implement, *please* discuss it on the
|
|
list first. It has already happened several times that two persons did the same
|
|
thing simultaneously. This is a waste of time for both of them. It's also very
|
|
common to see some changes rejected because they're done in a way that will
|
|
conflict with future evolutions, or that does not leave a good feeling. It's
|
|
always unpleasant for the person who did the work, and it is unpleasant for me
|
|
too because I value people's time and efforts. That would not happen if these
|
|
were discussed first. There is no problem posting work in progress to the list,
|
|
it happens quite often in fact. Also, don't waste your time with the doc when
|
|
submitting patches for review, only add the doc with the patch you consider
|
|
ready to merge.
|
|
|
|
If your work is very confidential and you can't publicly discuss it, you can
|
|
also mail me directly about it, but your mail may be waiting several days in
|
|
the queue before you get a response.
|
|
|
|
If you'd like a feature to be added but you think you don't have the skills to
|
|
implement it yourself, you should follow these steps :
|
|
|
|
1. discuss the feature on the mailing list. It is possible that someone
|
|
else has already implemented it, or that someone will tell you how to
|
|
proceed without it, or even why not to do it. It is also possible that
|
|
in fact it's quite easy to implement and people will guide you through
|
|
the process. That way you'll finally have YOUR patch merged, providing
|
|
the feature YOU need.
|
|
|
|
2. if you really can't code it yourself after discussing it, then you may
|
|
consider contacting someone to do the job for you. Some people on the
|
|
list might be OK with trying to do it. Otherwise, you can check the list
|
|
of contributors at the URL below, some of the regular contributors may
|
|
be able to do the work, probably not for free but their time is as much
|
|
valuable as yours after all, you can't eat the cake and have it too.
|
|
|
|
The list of past and regular contributors is available below. It lists not only
|
|
significant code contributions (features, fixes), but also time or money
|
|
donations :
|
|
|
|
http://haproxy.1wt.eu/contrib.html
|
|
|
|
Note to contributors: it's very handy when patches comes with a properly
|
|
formated subject. There are 3 criteria of particular importance in any patch :
|
|
|
|
- its nature (is it a fix for a bug, a new feature, an optimization, ...)
|
|
- its importance, which generally reflects the risk of merging/not merging it
|
|
- what area it applies to (eg: http, stats, startup, config, doc, ...)
|
|
|
|
It's important to make these 3 criteria easy to spot in the patch's subject,
|
|
because it's the first (and sometimes the only) thing which is read when
|
|
reviewing patches to find which ones need to be backported to older versions.
|
|
|
|
Specifically, bugs must be clearly easy to spot so that they're never missed.
|
|
Any patch fixing a bug must have the "BUG" tag in its subject. Most common
|
|
patch types include :
|
|
|
|
- BUG fix for a bug. The severity of the bug should also be indicated
|
|
when known. Similarly, if a backport is needed to older versions,
|
|
it should be indicated on the last line of the commit message. If
|
|
the bug has been identified as a regression brought by a specific
|
|
patch or version, this indication will be appreciated too. New
|
|
maintenance releases are generally emitted when a few of these
|
|
patches are merged.
|
|
|
|
- CLEANUP code cleanup, silence of warnings, etc... theorically no impact.
|
|
These patches will rarely be seen in stable branches, though they
|
|
may appear when they remove some annoyance or when they make
|
|
backporting easier. By nature, a cleanup is always minor.
|
|
|
|
- REORG code reorganization. Some blocks may be moved to other places,
|
|
some important checks might be swapped, etc... These changes
|
|
always present a risk of regression. For this reason, they should
|
|
never be mixed with any bug fix nor functional change. Code is
|
|
only moved as-is. Indicating the risk of breakage is highly
|
|
recommended.
|
|
|
|
- BUILD updates or fixes for build issues. Changes to makefiles also fall
|
|
into this category. The risk of breakage should be indicated if
|
|
known. It is also appreciated to indicate what platforms and/or
|
|
configurations were tested after the change.
|
|
|
|
- OPTIM some code was optimised. Sometimes if the regression risk is very
|
|
low and the gains significant, such patches may be merged in the
|
|
stable branch. Depending on the amount of code changed or replaced
|
|
and the level of trust the author has in the change, the risk of
|
|
regression should be indicated.
|
|
|
|
- RELEASE release of a new version (development or stable).
|
|
|
|
- LICENSE licensing updates (may impact distro packagers).
|
|
|
|
|
|
When the patch cannot be categorized, it's best not to put any tag. This is
|
|
commonly the case for new features, which development versions are mostly made
|
|
of.
|
|
|
|
Additionally, the importance of the patch should be indicated when known. A
|
|
single upper-case word is preferred, among :
|
|
|
|
- MINOR minor change, very low risk of impact. It is often the case for
|
|
code additions that don't touch live code. For a bug, it generally
|
|
indicates an annoyance, nothing more.
|
|
|
|
- MEDIUM medium risk, may cause unexpected regressions of low importance or
|
|
which may quickly be discovered. For a bug, it generally indicates
|
|
something odd which requires changing the configuration in an
|
|
undesired way to work around the issue.
|
|
|
|
- MAJOR major risk of hidden regression. This happens when I rearrange
|
|
large parts of code, when I play with timeouts, with variable
|
|
initializations, etc... We should only exceptionally find such
|
|
patches in stable branches. For a bug, it indicates severe
|
|
reliability issues for which workarounds are identified with or
|
|
without performance impacts.
|
|
|
|
- CRITICAL medium-term reliability or security is at risk and workarounds,
|
|
if they exist, might not always be acceptable. An upgrade is
|
|
absolutely required. A maintenance release may be emitted even if
|
|
only one of these bugs are fixed. Note that this tag is only used
|
|
with bugs. Such patches must indicate what is the first version
|
|
affected, and if known, the commit ID which introduced the issue.
|
|
|
|
If this criterion doesn't apply, it's best not to put it. For instance, most
|
|
doc updates and most examples or test files are just added or updated without
|
|
any need to qualify a level of importance.
|
|
|
|
The area the patch applies to is quite important, because some areas are known
|
|
to be similar in older versions, suggesting a backport might be desirable, and
|
|
conversely, some areas are known to be specific to one version. When the tag is
|
|
used alone, uppercase is preferred for readability, otherwise lowercase is fine
|
|
too. The following tags are suggested but not limitative :
|
|
|
|
- doc documentation updates or fixes. No code is affected, no need to
|
|
upgrade. These patches can also be sent right after a new feature,
|
|
to document it.
|
|
|
|
- examples example files. Be careful, sometimes these files are packaged.
|
|
|
|
- tests regression test files. No code is affected, no need to upgrade.
|
|
|
|
- init initialization code, arguments parsing, etc...
|
|
|
|
- config configuration parser, mostly used when adding new config keywords
|
|
|
|
- http the HTTP engine
|
|
|
|
- stats the stats reporting engine as well as the stats socket CLI
|
|
|
|
- checks the health checks engine (eg: when adding new checks)
|
|
|
|
- acl the ACL processing core or some ACLs from other areas
|
|
|
|
- peers the peer synchronization engine
|
|
|
|
- listeners everything related to incoming connection settings
|
|
|
|
- frontend everything related to incoming connection processing
|
|
|
|
- backend everything related to LB algorithms and server farm
|
|
|
|
- session session processing and flags (very sensible, be careful)
|
|
|
|
- server server connection management, queueing
|
|
|
|
- proxy proxy maintenance (start/stop)
|
|
|
|
- log log management
|
|
|
|
- poll any of the pollers
|
|
|
|
- halog the halog sub-component in the contrib directory
|
|
|
|
- contrib any addition to the contrib directory
|
|
|
|
Other names may be invented when more precise indications are meaningful, for
|
|
instance : "cookie" which indicates cookie processing in the HTTP core. Last,
|
|
indicating the name of the affected file is also a good way to quickly spot
|
|
changes. Many commits were already tagged with "stream_sock" or "cfgparse" for
|
|
instance.
|
|
|
|
It is desired that AT LEAST one of the 3 criteria tags is reported in the patch
|
|
subject. Ideally, we would have the 3 most often. The two first criteria should
|
|
be present before a first colon (':'). If both are present, then they should be
|
|
delimited with a slash ('/'). The 3rd criterion (area) should appear next, also
|
|
followed by a colon. Thus, all of the following messages are valid :
|
|
|
|
Examples of messages :
|
|
- DOC: document options forwardfor to logasap
|
|
- DOC/MAJOR: reorganize the whole document and change indenting
|
|
- BUG: stats: connection reset counters must be plain ascii, not HTML
|
|
- BUG/MINOR: stats: connection reset counters must be plain ascii, not HTML
|
|
- MEDIUM: checks: support multi-packet health check responses
|
|
- RELEASE: Released version 1.4.2
|
|
- BUILD: stats: stdint is not present on solaris
|
|
- OPTIM/MINOR: halog: make fgets parse more bytes by blocks
|
|
- REORG/MEDIUM: move syscall redefinition to specific places
|
|
|
|
Please do not use square brackets anymore around the tags, because they give me
|
|
more work when merging patches. By default I'm asking Git to keep them but this
|
|
causes trouble when patches are prefixed with the [PATCH] tag because in order
|
|
not to store it, I have to hand-edit the patches. So as of now, I will ask Git
|
|
to remove whatever is located between square brackets, which implies that any
|
|
subject formatted the old way will have its tag stripped out.
|
|
|
|
In fact, one of the only square bracket tags that still makes sense is '[RFC]'
|
|
at the beginning of the subject, when you're asking for someone to review your
|
|
change before getting it merged. If the patch is OK to be merged, then I can
|
|
merge it as-is and the '[RFC]' tag will automatically be removed. If you don't
|
|
want it to be merged at all, you can simply state it in the message, or use an
|
|
alternate '[WIP]' tag ("work in progress").
|
|
|
|
The tags are not rigid, follow your intuition first, anyway I reserve the right
|
|
to change them when merging the patch. It may happen that a same patch has a
|
|
different tag in two distinct branches. The reason is that a bug in one branch
|
|
may just be a cleanup in the other one because the code cannot be triggered.
|
|
|
|
|
|
For a more efficient interaction between the mainline code and your code, I can
|
|
only strongly encourage you to try the Git version control system :
|
|
|
|
http://git-scm.com/
|
|
|
|
It's very fast, lightweight and lets you undo/redo your work as often as you
|
|
want, without making your mistakes visible to the rest of the world. It will
|
|
definitely help you contribute quality code and take other people's feedback
|
|
in consideration. In order to clone the HAProxy Git repository :
|
|
|
|
$ git clone http://git.1wt.eu/git/haproxy-1.4.git (stable 1.4)
|
|
$ git clone http://git.1wt.eu/git/haproxy.git/ (development)
|
|
|
|
If you decide to use Git for your developments, then your commit messages will
|
|
have the subject line in the format described above, then the whole description
|
|
of your work (mainly why you did it) will be in the body. You can directly send
|
|
your commits to the mailing list, the format is convenient to read and process.
|
|
|
|
-- end
|