SeaweedFS unhealthy after upgrading to 26.4.1 behind a corporate proxy

[DragoonAethis]

Self-Hosted Version

26.4.1

CPU Architecture

x86_64

Docker Version

29.1.3

Docker Compose Version

2.33.1

Machine Specification

• My system meets the minimum system requirements of Sentry

Installation Type

Upgrade from 26.3.1

Steps to Reproduce

1. Prerequisite: Sentry host behind an explicit corporate proxy (you must have HTTP(S)_PROXY vars set to go online)
2. Bump the repo from 26.3.1 to 26.4.1
3. ./install.sh
4. Notice the installation fails as SeaweedFS reports itself as unhealthy.

Expected Result

Installing Sentry works.

Actual Result

Alas, it does not.

Everything including the no_proxy configuration from the self-hosted docs index page is set correctly, yet SeaweedFS is unable to start. The logs suggest something inside of SeaweedFS is trying to connect to itself via the proxy:

I0423 12:48:00.090499 masterclient.go:454 .master masterClient reconnection attempt #102
I0423 12:48:01.385576 volume_grpc_client_to_master.go:44 checkWithMaster 172.18.0.2:9333: get master 172.18.0.2:9333 configuration: rpc error: code = Unavailable desc = connection error: desc = "transport: Error while dialing: failed to do connect handshake, response: \"<response from the proxy>\""
I0423 12:48:01.799599 masterclient.go:454 .master masterClient reconnection attempt #103
I0423 12:48:03.490824 masterclient.go:454 .master masterClient reconnection attempt #104
...

I added a docker-compose.override.yml file with:

services:
  seaweedfs:
    environment:
      HTTP_PROXY: ""
      HTTPS_PROXY: ""
      http_proxy: ""
      https_proxy: ""

And now it installs and starts up correctly. The health check contains an explicit attempt to unset http_proxy too. I'm not sure if SeaweedFS ever has any business going online for self-hosted instances without replication etc (doesn't seem like it), so maybe these overrides could be set for the service globally?

Event ID

No response

[aldy505]

...so maybe these overrides could be set for the service globally?

Yes, you're correct.