IdleTimeout should be time then processor is killed if it sits idle. ExpireTimeout should be time then processor is killed (whatever it's doing, even then serving a request). It's kinda like security measure so processes wont stay up or stuck forever.
I haven't see your "no such process" errors.. ever. Running on centos 4 and 5 latest. 64bit. Janno DataCode Adrien Guinet wrote: > Hi everyone, > > First, thanks for the work you've done with peruser. > > I am running peruser 0.3 (the last stable version) with Apache 2.2.9 > under Debian Lenny, with about 150 different virtual hosts. > > Each virtual hosts has his own chroot. So far, it's working quite > well, but I have some questions about all different "timeouts" that > exists in the configuration. > > My peruser configuration is : > > <IfModule peruser.c> > # Multiplexer pool > MinMultiplexers 6 > MaxMultiplexers 80 > Multiplexer www-data www-data > ProcessorWaitTimeout 2 5 > > # Fork limits > ServerLimit 400 > MaxClients 20 > MaxRequestsPerChild 100 > > # Processor defaults > MinProcessors 0 > MinSpareProcessors 15 > MaxProcessors 100 > > # Timeouts > IdleTimeout 5 > ExpireTimeout 10 > </IfModule> > > For information, my typical vhost configuration is : > > <Processor proc_foo> > User foo > Group foo > Chroot /srv/web/foo > </Processor> > > <VirtualHost *:80> > ServerName foo.domain.com > DocumentRoot /htdocs > > ErrorLog /var/log/apache2/foo/error.log > CustomLog /var/log/apache2/foo/access.log combined > > ServerEnvironment proc_foo > [...] > </VirtualHost> > > I made the peruser configuration based on this page : > http://www.peruser.org/trac/projects/peruser/wiki/PeruserDocumentationInstallationDebian. > > I try to understand the real meaning of IdleTimeout, ExpireTimeout and > ProcessorWaitTimeout. Indeed, after a request is made to one of the > vhosts, the processes forked remains alive for more than all the > timeouts set (say more than 1 min), and sometimes, in apache2 error's > log, I have something like : > > [Fri Oct 23 09:30:18 2009] [warn] (3)No such process: kill SIGTERM > > [Fri Oct 23 09:30:18 2009] [warn] (3)No such process: kill SIGTERM > > [Fri Oct 23 09:30:18 2009] [warn] (3)No such process: kill SIGTERM > > [Fri Oct 23 09:30:18 2009] [warn] (3)No such process: kill SIGTERM > > [Fri Oct 23 09:30:18 2009] [warn] (3)No such process: kill SIGTERM > > [Fri Oct 23 09:30:18 2009] [warn] (3)No such process: kill SIGTERM > > [...] > > as if apache was trying to kill old processes/processes with wrong > numbers. It continues until I reboot apache. If I strace apache during > such a thing, it acutally looks like old apache's processes... > > By the way, I tried to find some answers by reading this : > http://www.directadmin.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-12794.html, but > this seems quite outdated. > > Maybe should I use the current experimental version, that sounds > promising based on its changelog > (http://www.telana.com/pipermail/peruser/2009-September/001143.html) ? > > Thanks for any help. > > Regards, > > _______________________________________________ Peruser mailing list [email protected] http://www.telana.com/mailman/listinfo/peruser
