)]}'
{"/PATCHSET_LEVEL":[{"author":{"_account_id":34883,"name":"Alexander Binzxxxxxx","email":"alexander.binzberger@wingcon.com","username":"DEvil000000"},"change_message_id":"50a09fc9033dc48b476557415e3856689b011f6c","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":4,"id":"39837074_156fd78e","updated":"2022-06-20 12:19:06.000000000","message":"_haproxy_default_tuning_params should contain all the old key/value pairs from haproxy_tuning_params right?\nI am not sure if \"tune.maxrewrite: 1280\" is big enough and also if the bufsize and chksize also needs to get increased.","commit_id":"be9a66c2807b5e7edb4f9868c6491ce26f0b5d7f"},{"author":{"_account_id":25023,"name":"Jonathan Rosser","email":"jonathan.rosser@rd.bbc.co.uk","username":"jrosser"},"change_message_id":"4cd5584e2e8f18aba57c64490cf56649dacf709f","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":4,"id":"f14e54c3_e36b2792","in_reply_to":"39837074_156fd78e","updated":"2022-06-21 06:17:25.000000000","message":"The problem with the old code was that the tuning parameters could never be extended beyond those that were already defined in the haproxy template. Now you are able to supply any tuning parameters you like (an example is given in defaults/main.yml).\n\nAlso the old behaviour was unexpected, just defining haproxy_tuning_params as an empty dict in your vars would have resulted in all of the template defaults being applied anyway.\n\nThe new code is not backward compatible as the release note states - any tuning params you want must now be explicitly set.\n\nmaxrewrite of 1280 is certainly enough to unblock our CI failures on centos-9 (which led us to find your github issue) - but if this is not enough in your situation then please let us know. Raising a bug at https://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack-ansible is really helpful.","commit_id":"be9a66c2807b5e7edb4f9868c6491ce26f0b5d7f"}]}