On Wed, 16 Jan 2002, Sander Temme wrote:
Hi all,
Built and ran HEAD on Darwin 5.2, and ran the httpd-test perl-framework.
This dies with the following protest:
server has died with status 255 (please examine t/logs/error_log)
Terminated
The log says:
[batmobile:perl-framework]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Index: http_main.c
===
RCS file: /home/cvs/apache-1.3/src/main/http_main.c,v
retrieving revision 1.569
retrieving revision 1.570
diff -u -r1.569 -r1.570
--- http_main.c 16 Jan 2002
Oops... I guess I didn't see that veto. Sorry 'bout that.
Do you prefer that I back out that whole section (since the addition
of the pthread mutex must be disabled if we back out just the below)
or keep this, with the understanding that if it's not addressed
within X days, we back it out then?
Jeff Trawick wrote:
Spell-checking would be nice too, though I wouldn't consider that a
requirement for removing the veto :)
Oh yes, I can see your arguement about that...
--
===
Jim Jagielski [|]
Jim Jagielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Oops... I guess I didn't see that veto. Sorry 'bout that.
Do you prefer that I back out that whole section (since the addition
of the pthread mutex must be disabled if we back out just the below)
or keep this, with the understanding that if it's not
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
On Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 08:54:34PM -0500, Greg Ames wrote:
Anyway, there's about 20 seconds worth of ktrace output at
http://www.apache.org/~gregames/ktrace. We might have some kind of thundering
herd problem - I see a whole bunch of unproductive context
Jeff Trawick wrote:
Jim Jagielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Oops... I guess I didn't see that veto. Sorry 'bout that.
Do you prefer that I back out that whole section (since the addition
of the pthread mutex must be disabled if we back out just the below)
or keep this, with the
Jeff Trawick [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Jim Jagielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
diff -ur apache-1.3/src/main/http_main.c apache-1.3-cygwin/src/main/http_main.c
--- apache-1.3/src/main/http_main.cWed Oct 17 14:45:30 2001
+++ apache-1.3-cygwin/src/main/http_main.c Tue Jan 1
Jeff Trawick wrote:
I will clarify my objection in another post and copy it to Stipe
directly in case he is behind in his mailing list reading.
+1... I see your post, but not sure I understand the concern. It's
almost like you don't see why the call isn't needed in Cygwin when
it is in
Jeff Trawick wrote:
Was this during the time you were playing?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Cron Daemon) writes:
at 17 Jan 2002 01:30:00 -
core dump found in /tmp/httpd.core
yep. From vi'ing the dump: /usr/local/apache2_0_28-logcpu/conf/httpd.conf,
which was running before I started last
On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 10:20:00AM -0500, Greg Ames wrote:
[snip]
As a matter of fact, I typically listen on two ports while testing to disable
S_L_U_A, so I can easily figure out which process will get the next connection
in case I want to gdb it. While trying out ktrace on my test config,
Hi,
Sorry for a late reply.
--On Tuesday, January 8, 2002 11:09 PM +0200 Eli Marmor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
ilker ARABACI wrote:
Is there any API used or on progress to get httpd global and
configuration values on runtime,
(not an httpd.conf file parser), something and more detailed like
Aaron Bannert wrote:
On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 10:20:00AM -0500, Greg Ames wrote:
[snip]
As a matter of fact, I typically listen on two ports while testing to disable
S_L_U_A, so I can easily figure out which process will get the next connection
in case I want to gdb it. While trying out
From: Ryan Bloom [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 2:39 PM
wrowe 02/01/17 12:15:12
Modified:server main.c log.c
include http_log.h http_main.h
Log:
Allow the user to get detailed debugging information without a full
Hi Bill,
Thanks for picking up that patch.. Another update that I had from
the HPUX TCP team was that they considering changing the return code from
ENOBUFS to ECONNRESET (which is what it is on most platforms) - but I'm not
sure when are they going to do that.. So, for the time being,
Hi,
I'm not sure if this is the right place for this question (pl. shoot
it down if not).
Has anybody tried benchmarking Apache 2.0 in a SPECweb99
environment..If yes, would you mind sharing the results.. (BTW, I'm just
trying to understand how Apache fares against other
Greg Ames wrote:
I had 2.0.30-dev up briefly on daedalus tonight to collect doc on our load spike
problem.
Anyway, there's about 20 seconds worth of ktrace output at
http://www.apache.org/~gregames/ktrace. We might have some kind of thundering
herd problem - I see a whole bunch of
Aaron Bannert wrote:
got my nose out of the ktraces finally, so I re-read this a little closer.
A quick glance at sendfile_it_all in server/core.c looks to me
like it would loop repeatedly on that error condition, as we are seeing
it in the ktrace output.
No, you have to look at how
Greg Ames wrote:
Getting a lot closer. httpd://www.apache.org/~gregames/ktrace.2_0_28 now has 30
some seconds of ktrace for comparison purposes. Interestingly enough, this file
is considerably smaller than the 2.0.30-dev file which ran for less time.
There's about twice the context switches
On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 10:43:18PM -0800, Brian Pane wrote:
[snip]
prefork was changed to do a apr_poll before the accept, even in the single
listen case, on Nov 10. The polls seem to get added to the herd of selects
that
wake up several times a second for no real good reason. We need to
Aaron Bannert wrote:
On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 10:43:18PM -0800, Brian Pane wrote:
[snip]
prefork was changed to do a apr_poll before the accept, even in the single
listen case, on Nov 10. The polls seem to get added to the herd of selects
that
wake up several times a second for no real good
21 matches
Mail list logo
