On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 5:03 AM, Danny Sadinoff <da...@sadinoff.com> wrote: > On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 1:47 AM, Danny Sadinoff <da...@sadinoff.com> wrote: >> >> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 12:53 AM, Jeff Trawick <traw...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 5:16 PM, Danny Sadinoff >> > <danny.sadin...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > 2) Virtual hosts >> > > The above item holds true even across virtual hosts. So while >> > > it's possible to adjust the FcgidInitialEnv items on a per-vhost >> > > basis, this is a recipe for disaster if two vhosts point at the same >> > > fcgi executable, because the resulting processes with potentially >> > > different Environments will be inserted into the same pool. Once that >> > > occurs, we may expect that a server spawned with config defined in >> > > vhost A will be parcelled out to vhost B. >> > >> > Where does this occur? Entries in the process table are distinguished >> > by virtual host. (I think the implementation of this check is broken, >> > in that it requires that ServerName is set in the virtual hosts. Are >> > you using a simple test config that doesn't have ServerName set?) >> >> My case is not yet simple. I'll get back to you. > > It turns out that the problem was that I was using mod_fcgid-2.2 Upgrading > to mod_fcigd-2.3.4 fixed the problem. I apologize for the noise.
great/np > Should this item (vhost independence) be added to the upgrade notes section? Unfortunately, I'm still in the dark about vhost independence and how exactly the share_grp_id construct in the source code can change the process association without more code written to tie it to the configuration. ISTR that Rainer made the same observation -- share_grp_id isn't completely implemented. (Maybe it once worked and some code was lost?) > Are new features in mod_fcgid going to be manifest in the documentation in > general? definitely
