Hi Jarno, On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 01:08:14PM +0300, Jarno Huuskonen wrote: > Hello, > > I was testing haproxy -> uwsgi(alert.io) and noticed a possible regression > with healthchecks(httpchk). > With 1.9.9 uwsgi logs: > [uwsgi-http key: host.name.fi client_addr: 127.0.0.1 client_port: 45715] > hr_read(): Connection reset by peer [plugins/http/http.c line 917] > > health checks work > (option httpchk GET /_ HTTP/1.1\r\nHost:\ host.name.fi\r\nUser-Agent:\ > haproxy) > but uwsgi logs the hr_read() warning/error. > > I bisected 1.9.9 and this commit is probably the commit that changes > behaviour between 1.9.8 and 1.9.9: > 5d0cb90eb78f869e8801b34eddfdfd5dd8360e71 is the first bad commit > commit 5d0cb90eb78f869e8801b34eddfdfd5dd8360e71 > Author: Olivier Houchard <[email protected]> > Date: Fri Jun 14 15:26:06 2019 +0200 > > BUG/MEDIUM: connections: Don't call shutdown() if we want to disable > linger. > > In conn_sock_shutw(), avoid calling shutdown() if linger_risk is set. Not > doing so will result in getting sockets in TIME_WAIT for some time. > This is particularly observable with health checks. > > This should be backported to 1.9. > > (cherry picked from commit fe4abe62c7c5206dff1802f42d17014e198b9141) > Signed-off-by: Christopher Faulet <[email protected]>
Hmmm that's annoying, really, because we've opened a huge can of worms when fixing the first failed check and we're constantly displacing the problem somewhere else :-/ Yes, please do provide an strace, and a tcpdump, that would be nice. I suspect that we'll possibly see a FIN from the server, without the equivalent recv()==0 in haproxy, and that the setsockopt() call resulting in the RST being sent doesn't ack the FIN. Normally we should perform a clean shutdown+close if the FIN was received with the response and detected in time. I'm seeing that your check request doesn't contain "connection: close", so actually it's possible that your server doesn't send the SYN, in which case we really need to close with RST. Could you please try to add "connection: close" to your httpchk line ? Regards, Willy
