Jeff, I'm going over the pools code right now. I'm wondering if something slipped in when I checked in the APR_POOL_DEBUG code (*grunt*)
Could you do me a favor and try with one rev earlier to see if it has the same problem? In the mean time I'll try and track it down. Sander > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Jeff Trawick > Sent: 10 January 2002 17:29 > To: dev@apr.apache.org; dev@httpd.apache.org > Subject: pool problems with HEAD?? > > > CVS HEAD, Solaris, worker MPM, one process with many threads > > <IfModule worker.c> > ServerLimit 1 > ThreadLimit 500 > StartServers 1 > MaxClients 500 > MinSpareThreads 25 > MaxSpareThreads 75 > ThreadsPerChild 500 > MaxRequestsPerChild 0 > </IfModule> > > I had a client with many concurrent connections continually doing the > same request over and over. > > After starting another client to get another 200 or so concurrent > connections, I quickly got a segfault in mod_log_config because > supposedly apr_palloc returned some bogus addresses (0 and 0x38). > > #0 0x3fd84 in config_log_transaction (r=Cannot access memory at > address 0xed5018f4 > ) at mod_log_config.c:823 > 823 strs[i] = process_item(r, orig, &items[i]); > (gdb) p strs > $1 = (char **) 0x0 > (gdb) p format->nelts > $2 = 14 > (gdb) p strl > $4 = (int *) 0x38 > (gdb) p i > $5 = 0 > (gdb) > (gdb) where > #0 0x3fd84 in config_log_transaction (r=0x6a62c8, cls=0x1add38, > default_format=0x15cde8) > at mod_log_config.c:823 > #1 0x3ffd4 in multi_log_transaction (r=0x6a2618) at > mod_log_config.c:881 > #2 0xc3f98 in ap_run_log_transaction (r=0x6a2618) at protocol.c:1297 > #3 0x53228 in ap_process_request (r=0x6a2618) at http_request.c:315 > #4 0x4b150 in ap_process_http_connection (c=0x6a0758) at > http_core.c:280 > #5 0xba72c in ap_run_process_connection (c=0x6a0758) at > connection.c:84 > #6 0xbace4 in ap_process_connection (c=0x6a0758) at connection.c:230 > #7 0xa08bc in process_socket (p=0x6a0638, sock=0x6a0670, > my_child_num=0, my_thread_num=187) > at worker.c:562 > #8 0xa11f4 in worker_thread (thd=0x2bef88, dummy=0x1163b0) at > worker.c:777 > #9 0xff340990 in ?? () > > The funkiness about r changing in the traceback is (I suspect) because > in multi_log_transaction we walked through a list of r's using the > parameter as the variable. Both r's look healthy. > > Running a level of code from about a day before 2.0.30 on AIX this > morning, running about the same worker MPM config, I got a segfault > down in apr_palloc() because some heap structures were messed up. > > Has anybody pounded on an Apache configured like that (one process, > many threads)? > > -- > Jeff Trawick | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | PGP public key at web site: > http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Park/9289/ > Born in Roswell... married an alien... > >
