Re: Regarding Apache 2.0.48 and specweb99

2003-12-02 Thread gregames
MATHIHALLI,MADHUSUDAN (HP-Cupertino,ex1) wrote: I think I found the problem (.. and it's not the cgid exiting problem). The problem was because the default Listen Backlog in mod_cgid was a little small (100 outstanding connections). I got the following tusc log for the httpd processes : {62717} con

Problems in using flood for mini_httpd

2003-12-02 Thread idir fodil
Hy all, I have installed flood and I am trying to use it for mini_httpd evaluation. All connections established by flood failed. Does flood only oriented for httpd tests ? or there is some configuration to do in order to evaluate mini_httpd ? Thank you for help best regards

RE: Regarding Apache 2.0.48 and specweb99

2003-12-02 Thread MATHIHALLI,MADHUSUDAN (HP-Cupertino,ex1)
>-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [SNIP] >I'm glad you're making progress. But I'm wondering why >raising the mod_cgid >Listen backlog was so important. If 100 mod_cgid connections >wasn't enough at >some point, either the workload is spikey or t

RE: Regarding Apache 2.0.48 and specweb99

2003-12-02 Thread MATHIHALLI,MADHUSUDAN (HP-Cupertino,ex1)
I enabled the POST transactions, and all of a sudden, the apache process is now hung (this is first time I'm seeing this behaviour).. The stack is : (gdb) t 21 [Switching to thread 21 (system thread 29207)] #0 0xc0306850:0 in _semop_sys+0x30 () from /usr/lib/hpux64/libc.so.1 (gdb) bt #0

RE: Regarding Apache 2.0.48 and specweb99

2003-12-02 Thread MATHIHALLI,MADHUSUDAN (HP-Cupertino,ex1)
I think I found the problem (.. and it's not the cgid exiting problem). The problem was because the default Listen Backlog in mod_cgid was a little small (100 outstanding connections). I got the following tusc log for the httpd processes : {62717} connect(13, 0x9fffbebbfe60, 94)