On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 06:00:59PM +0200, Conrad Hoffmann wrote: > On 04/13/2017 05:10 PM, Olivier Houchard wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 04:59:26PM +0200, Conrad Hoffmann wrote: > >> Sure, here it is ;P > >> > >> I now get a segfault (on reload): > >> > >> *** Error in `/usr/sbin/haproxy': corrupted double-linked list: > >> 0x0000000005b511e0 *** > >> > >> Here is the backtrace, retrieved from the core file: > >> > >> (gdb) bt > >> #0 0x00007f4c92801067 in __GI_raise (sig=sig@entry=6) at > >> ../nptl/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/raise.c:56 > >> #1 0x00007f4c92802448 in __GI_abort () at abort.c:89 > >> #2 0x00007f4c9283f1b4 in __libc_message (do_abort=do_abort@entry=1, > >> fmt=fmt@entry=0x7f4c92934210 "*** Error in `%s': %s: 0x%s ***\n") at > >> ../sysdeps/posix/libc_fatal.c:175 > >> #3 0x00007f4c9284498e in malloc_printerr (action=1, str=0x7f4c929302ec > >> "corrupted double-linked list", ptr=<optimized out>) at malloc.c:4996 > >> #4 0x00007f4c92845923 in _int_free (av=0x7f4c92b71620 <main_arena>, > >> p=<optimized out>, have_lock=0) at malloc.c:3996 > >> #5 0x0000000000485850 in tcp_find_compatible_fd (l=0xaaed20) at > >> src/proto_tcp.c:812 > >> #6 tcp_bind_listener (listener=0xaaed20, errmsg=0x7ffccc774e10 "", > >> errlen=100) at src/proto_tcp.c:878 > >> #7 0x0000000000493ce1 in start_proxies (verbose=0) at src/proxy.c:793 > >> #8 0x00000000004091ec in main (argc=21, argv=0x7ffccc775168) at > >> src/haproxy.c:1942 > > > > Ok, yet another stupid mistake, hopefully the attached patch fixes this :) > > > > Thanks ! > > > > Olivier > > > It does indeed! Not only does it work now, the result is impressive! Not a > single dropped request even when aggressively reloading under substantial > load! > > You certainly gave me an unexpected early easter present here :) > > I will now head out, but I am planning on installing a 1.8 version with > your patches on our canary pool (which receives a small amount of > production traffic to test changes) after the holidays. I will happily test > anything else that might be helpful for you. I will also set up a proper > load test inside our data center then, but I expect no surprises there (my > current tests were done over a VPN link, somewhat limiting the achievable > throughput). > > Once more, thank you so much! This will greatly simplify much of our > operations. If there is anything else we can help test, let me know :)
Pfew, at least :) Thanks a lot for your patience, and doing all that testing ! Olivier
