Re: slotmem + balancer

> On May 20, 2018, at 4:59 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote: > > > Now we are back to 2.4.29 code, r1822341 is in again, and I committed > additional changes (minimal hopefully) to address the issues reported > in PR 62308 (and PR 62044 still). My own testing, based on the tests > run by the OP (his on W

Re: slotmem + balancer

> Am 22.05.2018 um 10:16 schrieb Yann Ylavic : > > On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 10:06 AM, Stefan Eissing > wrote: >> >> Could you, just as a rough description, list which >> test cases would have prevented the bugs? Maybe someone >> would feel like implementing them (or in case of a future >> code

Re: slotmem + balancer

On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 10:06 AM, Stefan Eissing wrote: > > Could you, just as a rough description, list which > test cases would have prevented the bugs? Maybe someone > would feel like implementing them (or in case of a future > code change there, could at least manually find some > instructions

Re: slotmem + balancer

Yann, thanks for your perseverance on this. Could you, just as a rough description, list which test cases would have prevented the bugs? Maybe someone would feel like implementing them (or in case of a future code change there, could at least manually find some instructions on what to test in the

Re: slotmem + balancer

Thanks, Yann;    This does help explain the rationale and I appreciate you taking the time to walk us through the reasoning. -- Daniel Ruggeri On 5/20/2018 3:59 PM, Yann Ylavic wrote: > On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 7:19 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: >> I am under the impression is that we should likely re

Re: slotmem + balancer

On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 7:19 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > I am under the impression is that we should likely restore mod_slotmem_shm > back to its "orig" condition, So I did this (r1831868), > either: > >o > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/slotmem/mod_slotmem_shm.c?view=m

Re: slotmem + balancer

> On May 12, 2018, at 10:23 AM, Mark Blackman wrote: > > I think you will find it difficult to re-work effectively unless you can > identify representative test cases possibly including a segfault. > > For me the most important characteristics of the fix were (a) to more > accurately identif

Re: slotmem + balancer

> On 8 May 2018, at 18:19, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > I am under the impression is that we should likely restore mod_slotmem_shm > back to its "orig" condition, either: > >o > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/slotmem/mod_slotmem_shm.c?view=markup&pathrev=1822341 >

Re: slotmem + balancer

r1831218 was reverted (for the reasons explained in r1831396). r1831394 is the right/compatible fix I think, does it still work for you with latest trunk (r1831396+)? On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 9:11 AM, Stefan Eissing wrote: > I can confirm. This solves the problem in my setup. > >> Am 09.05.2018 um

Re: slotmem + balancer

I can confirm. This solves the problem in my setup. > Am 09.05.2018 um 03:25 schrieb Yann Ylavic : > > On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 1:25 AM, Yann Ylavic wrote: >> I can reproduce with global balancers (10 is your number of vhosts >> presumably, hence with global balancers there are as many sets of >>

Re: slotmem + balancer

On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 1:25 AM, Yann Ylavic wrote: > I can reproduce with global balancers (10 is your number of vhosts > presumably, hence with global balancers there are as many sets of > files). > Let me look at what's happening for the failure... Should be fixed in r1831218.

Re: slotmem + balancer

I can reproduce with global balancers (10 is your number of vhosts presumably, hence with global balancers there are as many sets of files). Let me look at what's happening for the failure... On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 12:45 AM, Yann Ylavic wrote: > Hi Stefan, > > what system is this, and which SHM m

Re: slotmem + balancer

Hi Stefan, what system is this, and which SHM mechanism (ie. APR_USE_SHMEM_* defined in your "include/apr.h")? The children processes fail to init (attach SHMs), although they should be inherited on unixes (found in global list), could you please provide [debug] logs? Thanks, Yann. On Tue, May

Re: slotmem + balancer

I am under the impression is that we should likely restore mod_slotmem_shm back to its "orig" condition, either: o http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/trunk/modules/slotmem/mod_slotmem_shm.c?view=markup&pathrev=1822341 o h

Re: slotmem + balancer

Correction, the log seems to be filling with these entries every 1-2 seconds. The server does not progress further and does not answer to requests. Any idea? > Am 08.05.2018 um 16:50 schrieb Stefan Eissing : > > r1831192 on trunk. Every time I stop/start my test server, I get a new set of > slo

slotmem + balancer

r1831192 on trunk. Every time I stop/start my test server, I get a new set of slotmem-shm-p*.sh m files and the log says 10 times: ... [Tue May 08 14:43:12.728333 2018] [proxy_balancer:emerg] [pid 49764:tid 140736151831424] AH01205: slotmem_attach failed There are 10 sets of files. I have 5 bal