6:26 p.m.
In
https://github.com/undertow-io/undertow/blob/master/examples/src/main/jav...
a
LoadBalancingProxyClient and a reverse proxy server are being used to proxy
HTTPS, but is all of that necessary?
I'm attempting to proxy from my current code:
SimpleProxyClientProvider proxyClient = new SimpleProxyClientProvider(uri);
ProxyHandler proxyHandler = Handlers.proxyHandler(proxyClient);
To add support to proxy SSL. The proxying is local and both the originating
server and the server being proxied to are using the exact same SSL
certificate. Is there something I can add to this to make it work right,
or do I have to create a LoadBalancingProxyClient?
6:34 p.m.
In general you are much better off using LoadBalancingProxyClient
(even if there is only one server). SimpleProxyClient uses a 1-1
connection mapping, while LoadBalancingProxyClient uses connection
pools and in general is much more sophisticated.
I am not sure what to do about SimpleProxyClient, I think it should
probably just be deprecated and removed in a future release.
Stuart
On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Hicks, Matt <matt(a)matthicks.com> wrote:
In
https://github.com/undertow-io/undertow/blob/master/examples/src/main/jav...
a LoadBalancingProxyClient and a reverse proxy server are being used to
proxy HTTPS, but is all of that necessary?
I'm attempting to proxy from my current code:
SimpleProxyClientProvider proxyClient = new SimpleProxyClientProvider(uri);
ProxyHandler proxyHandler = Handlers.proxyHandler(proxyClient);
To add support to proxy SSL. The proxying is local and both the originating
server and the server being proxied to are using the exact same SSL
certificate. Is there something I can add to this to make it work right, or
do I have to create a LoadBalancingProxyClient?
_______________________________________________
undertow-dev mailing list
undertow-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/undertow-dev
6:37 p.m.
Thanks for the info Stuart. I'll switch. LoadBalancingProxyClient should
just be a drop-in replacement for SimpleProxyClientProvider, right?
On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 5:34 PM Stuart Douglas <sdouglas(a)redhat.com> wrote:
In general you are much better off using LoadBalancingProxyClient
(even if there is only one server). SimpleProxyClient uses a 1-1
connection mapping, while LoadBalancingProxyClient uses connection
pools and in general is much more sophisticated.
I am not sure what to do about SimpleProxyClient, I think it should
probably just be deprecated and removed in a future release.
Stuart
On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Hicks, Matt <matt(a)matthicks.com> wrote:
> In
>
https://github.com/undertow-io/undertow/blob/master/examples/src/main/jav...
> a LoadBalancingProxyClient and a reverse proxy server are being used to
> proxy HTTPS, but is all of that necessary?
>
> I'm attempting to proxy from my current code:
>
> SimpleProxyClientProvider proxyClient = new
SimpleProxyClientProvider(uri);
> ProxyHandler proxyHandler = Handlers.proxyHandler(proxyClient);
>
> To add support to proxy SSL. The proxying is local and both the
originating
> server and the server being proxied to are using the exact same SSL
> certificate. Is there something I can add to this to make it work
right, or
> do I have to create a LoadBalancingProxyClient?
>
> _______________________________________________
> undertow-dev mailing list
> undertow-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/undertow-dev
6:54 p.m.
Yes, although it you may want to increase connectionsPerThread from
its default of 10 depending on how much load you have.
In general Undertow will create 1 IO Thread per processor, so you will
end up with 10 * CPU's connections per backend. This may be fine, or
you may want to increase it if you have a lot of load.
You can also adjust maxQueueSize to control how many requests will be
queued up if all the backend connections are busy.
Stuart
On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 10:37 AM, Hicks, Matt <matt(a)matthicks.com> wrote:
Thanks for the info Stuart. I'll switch.
LoadBalancingProxyClient should
just be a drop-in replacement for SimpleProxyClientProvider, right?
On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 5:34 PM Stuart Douglas <sdouglas(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>
> In general you are much better off using LoadBalancingProxyClient
> (even if there is only one server). SimpleProxyClient uses a 1-1
> connection mapping, while LoadBalancingProxyClient uses connection
> pools and in general is much more sophisticated.
>
> I am not sure what to do about SimpleProxyClient, I think it should
> probably just be deprecated and removed in a future release.
>
> Stuart
>
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Hicks, Matt <matt(a)matthicks.com> wrote:
> > In
> >
> >
https://github.com/undertow-io/undertow/blob/master/examples/src/main/jav...
> > a LoadBalancingProxyClient and a reverse proxy server are being used to
> > proxy HTTPS, but is all of that necessary?
> >
> > I'm attempting to proxy from my current code:
> >
> > SimpleProxyClientProvider proxyClient = new
> > SimpleProxyClientProvider(uri);
> > ProxyHandler proxyHandler = Handlers.proxyHandler(proxyClient);
> >
> > To add support to proxy SSL. The proxying is local and both the
> > originating
> > server and the server being proxied to are using the exact same SSL
> > certificate. Is there something I can add to this to make it work
> > right, or
> > do I have to create a LoadBalancingProxyClient?
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > undertow-dev mailing list
> > undertow-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/undertow-dev
2688
days inactive
2688
days old
3 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Hicks, Matt -
Stuart Douglas