You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@trafficserver.apache.org by Andreas Wederbrand <an...@wederbrand.se> on 2020/11/20 14:15:38 UTC
ATS 7.1 as reverse proxy timeouts on POST after 30 seconds instead of
1800 seconds
Hi!
I'm running ATS 7.1 as a reverse proxy and one of our origins takes 30+
seconds occasionally. I thought that
*proxy.config.http.post_connect_attempts_timeout* would control that. It is
set to it's default of 1800 seconds (30 minutes!?) but we still see a 504
after 30 seconds.
Am I missing something? Am I looking at the wrong configuration?
Thanks.
Re: [E] ATS 7.1 as reverse proxy timeouts on POST after 30 seconds
instead of 1800 seconds
Posted by Susan Hinrichs <sh...@verizonmedia.com>.
There are two kinds of timeouts involved. One is the various
*connect_attempts_timeout. This timeout only applies while the connection
to the origin is being established (e.g. TLS handshake or TCP three-way for
non-TLS). Then the regular
proxy.config.http.transaction_no_activity_timeout_out applies while waiting
for the first byte and all other bytes exchanged with the origin.
But you are running 71. The connect_timeouts may have been applied until
the first byte was received. I think this was fixed to be the proper
connect timeout instead of TTFB timeout in the 8.x timeframe. So in that
case any POST/PUT method requests would by default wait 1800 seconds for
the first byte to return. All other methods would wait the time specified
in proxy.config.http.connect_attempts_timeout which appears to default to
30 seconds.
Susan
On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 8:16 AM Andreas Wederbrand <an...@wederbrand.se>
wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I'm running ATS 7.1 as a reverse proxy and one of our origins takes 30+
> seconds occasionally. I thought that
> *proxy.config.http.post_connect_attempts_timeout* would control that. It
> is set to it's default of 1800 seconds (30 minutes!?) but we still see a
> 504 after 30 seconds.
>
> Am I missing something? Am I looking at the wrong configuration?
>
> Thanks.
>