-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
- --On Wednesday, June 13, 2007 20:15:56 +0200 Ulrich Spoerlein
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
was your leak a kernel leak or a user leak (if it actually makes a
difference).
I don't know ... it was caused by an application, but nothing was freed up
On 6/14/07, Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't know ... it was caused by an application, but nothing was freed up
after the application was stop'd ...
In my case the sockets are closed only if I stop the samba processes. When I
just changed the connection mode from Unix Socket
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
- --On Thursday, June 14, 2007 14:03:27 -0300 Alexandre Biancalana
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 6/14/07, Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't know ... it was caused by an application, but nothing was freed up
after the application
On 6/14/07, Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
- --On Thursday, June 14, 2007 14:03:27 -0300 Alexandre Biancalana
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 6/14/07, Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't know ... it was caused by an
Hi,
as you are aware, there is a unix domain socket leak in 6-STABLE,
which AFAIK is not yet fully fixed.
I wanted to ask about the status or some possible fixes, as I know a
way to reproduce the problem in a matter of minutes.
We are running Cyrus and Postfix with the user DB in OpenLDAP
Ulrich Spoerlein wrote:
Hi,
as you are aware, there is a unix domain socket leak in 6-STABLE,
which AFAIK is not yet fully fixed.
We are running Cyrus and Postfix with the user DB in OpenLDAP. When
using ldapi://%2fvar%2frun%2fopenldap%2fldapi/ as a connection URL for
both Postfix' user
On Wed, Jun 13, 2007 at 04:22:45PM +0200, Ulrich Spoerlein wrote:
Hi,
as you are aware, there is a unix domain socket leak in 6-STABLE,
which AFAIK is not yet fully fixed.
I wanted to ask about the status or some possible fixes, as I know a
way to reproduce the problem in a matter
On Wed, 13 Jun 2007 16:22:45 +0200, Ulrich Spoerlein
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
as you are aware, there is a unix domain socket leak in 6-STABLE,
which AFAIK is not yet fully fixed.
I wanted to ask about the status or some possible fixes, as I know a
way to reproduce the problem
On 6/13/07, Ivan Voras [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can you perhaps isolate the bug / give more information on it? I'm
asking because I'm currently using an application with unix domain
sockets in production wich handles lots of connects/disconnects per
second and it doesn't seem to show leakage.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
- --On Wednesday, June 13, 2007 09:17:36 -0700 Jeremy Chadwick
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've seen this kind of problem with domain sockets (at least on Linux
with a multi-use tool called busybox) where on error conditions the
code never
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
'k, just to ring in here ... I can definitely attest to there being a leak
here, as it was me that was originally burned by it ... in my case, I
eventually was able to isolate which VPS/jail was causing it and haven't run
it
since, but was never able to determine
On Wed, Jun 13, 2007 at 08:15:56PM +0200, Ulrich Spoerlein wrote:
I wonder though: maxfilesperproc is roughly 12k, but lsof needs to only
count 2.5k lines of slapd output when the limit is hit. Is there
a better way to check, how much fds/resources are open by a certain process?
sockstat is
On 6/13/07, Ulrich Spoerlein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
as you are aware, there is a unix domain socket leak in 6-STABLE,
which AFAIK is not yet fully fixed.
I wanted to ask about the status or some possible fixes, as I know a
way to reproduce the problem in a matter of minutes.
We
* Alexandre Biancalana [EMAIL PROTECTED] [070613 12:40] wrote:
On 6/13/07, Ulrich Spoerlein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
as you are aware, there is a unix domain socket leak in 6-STABLE,
which AFAIK is not yet fully fixed.
I wanted to ask about the status or some possible fixes, as I
On 6/13/07, Alfred Perlstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would advise running truss or ktrace against the process
to see if it's actually attempting to close the descriptor.
this would explain if the leak is in the application, or
maybe libc/kernel.
--
- Alfred Perlstein
Hi !
I change
15 matches
Mail list logo