On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 09:58:27AM +0200, Pavlos Parissis wrote: > On 13/04/2017 06:18 μμ, Olivier Houchard wrote: > > 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 > > > > > Joining this again a bit late, do you still want me to test it? > I would like to know if there are any performance impact, but I see that > Conrad Hoffmann has done all the hard work on this. So, we can conclude that > we > don't expect any performance impact. > > Once again thanks a lot for your hard work on this. > @Conrad Hoffmann, thanks a lot for testing this and checking if there is any > performance impact. >
Hi Pavlos, More testing is always appreciated :) I don't expect any performance impact, but that wouldn't be the first time I say that and am proven wrong, though as you said with all the testing Conrad did, I'm fairly confident it should be OK. Thanks ! Olivier
