On Sun, 2007-09-16 at 20:39 +0100, bert wrote: > Perhaps someone who understands this code better can shed some light > on it? Is it that somehow the receive_from_multiplexer function fails > to copy across the sin6 field?
I'm going to take a look at this when I get a chance, it'd be awesome if we could resolve this issue since most of the other big problems have been fixed now. The keepalive patch has been working great for me, though I did have apache stop responding one time, the day after I starting running with the new patch, so I wanted to give it some time and see if it happened again, and it hasn't. So I'm going to assume it was unrelated, and make a 0.2.3 release later today. If we can fix the 0.0.0.0 problem I'd like to release that as 0.3, I figure a version of peruser with so many problems fixed deserves a minor version number increment :) I feel like we're still a long way off from 1.0, though... someday I'd really like to see if we can replace all that shared memory stuff with some kind of socket-based approach, ie have the processors and multiplexers communicate over sockets rather than through shared memory tables. -- Sean Gabriel Heacock Telana Internet Services http://www.telana.com/ _______________________________________________ Peruser mailing list [email protected] http://www.telana.com/mailman/listinfo/peruser
