503 errors on POST

[Jacob Fenton]

Hi,

I've found that certain POST requests fail when passed to a healthy backend,
though I'm not convinced this is a problem with varnish. I found that while
a given post request failed--repeatably--using one internet service
provider, the same POST worked from another ISP. It does seem that this
problem only happens on larger POSTs. I'm too much of a dunce on networking
issues to really debug this, but am happy to speculate wildly that it might
have something to do with multipart encoding? Subtle differences in how
multipart is handled in http 1 and 1.1? Skeezy ISP's and/or packet lengths ?


If someone who's resolved this problem has any thoughts, or if this is
already documented in the wiki somewhere that I didn't look, I'd love to
hear it. FWIW, I'm running varnish-2.1.2 on ubuntu hardy heron.

--jacob fenton


On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 2:48 AM, Modesto Alexandre <alex at arcalpin.com>wrote:

> Le mardi 21 décembre 2010, Flavio Torres a écrit :
> > Hello,
> >
> > On 12/20/2010 07:58 AM, Modesto Alexandre wrote:
> > > Here are the errors I have (I have masked the private information):
> > >
> > > http://demo.ovh.net/view/6ac24fbc5400039bc86fd3444556ef76/0.colored
> >
> > Your backend seems not be good. How is your backend_health [1] ?
> >
> > [1] - http://www.varnish-cache.org/trac/wiki/BackendPolling
>
> Backends look good :
>
> varnishadm -T localhost:6082 debug.health
> Backend backend1 is Healthy
> Current states  good: 10 threshold:  8 window: 10
> Average responsetime of good probes: 0.144168
> Oldest                                                    Newest
> ================================================================
> 4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444 Good IPv4
> XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Good Xmit
> RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR- Good Recv
> HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH- Happy
> Backend backend3 is Healthy
> Current states  good:  9 threshold:  8 window: 10
> Average responsetime of good probes: 0.106183
> Oldest                                                    Newest
> ================================================================
> 4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444 Good IPv4
> XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Good Xmit
> RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR-R Good Recv
> HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH-H Happy
> Backend backend2 is Healthy
> Current states  good:  9 threshold:  8 window: 10
> Average responsetime of good probes: 0.092774
> Oldest                                                    Newest
> ================================================================
> 4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444 Good IPv4
> XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Good Xmit
> RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR- Good Recv
> HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH- Happy
>
> Configuration of backend pooling :
>
> backend backend1 {
> .host = "ip.ip.ip.ip";
> .port = "80";
> .connect_timeout = 300s;
> .first_byte_timeout = 300s;
> .between_bytes_timeout = 300s;
>  .probe = {
>                .url = "/url.gif";
>                .timeout = 1500 ms;
>                .interval = 5s;
>                .window = 10;
>                .threshold = 8;
>        }
>
> }
> backend2 & backend3 have the same configuration
>
> any idea ?
>
> Alex.
>
> _______________________________________________
> varnish-misc mailing list
> varnish-misc at varnish-cache.org
> http://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/pipermail/varnish-misc/attachments/20110106/8667ed32/attachment-0003.html>