Sorry, I meant to say at the end "I realize uwsgi is not the problem here; I blame *hgweb* and buildbot."
-Andrew On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 9:14 AM, Andrew Fischer <wizzr...@gmail.com> wrote: > I've been running uwsgi for about a year and I've run into a situation > that I can't seem to sort out. I'm not positive there is a good > solution, but maybe someone with far more knowledge than I could shed > some light. I'll give some background, please bear with me. > > I run uwsig behind nginx to run a simple mercurial hgweb server. My > uwsgi configuration is pretty basic: > > "-M -p 4 -d /var/log/$daemon_name.log --pidfile /run/$daemon_name.pid > --pythonpath $hgwebpath --module $hgwebmodule" > > However, I recently added buildbot to our setup, which is triggered by > a commit hook in hgweb. It's all built in stuff, I didn't write any of > it. > > Unfortunately this hook uses fork, and so generates defunct uwsgi > instances when it occurs. It appears to be a known issue with the > buildbot. > > I decided uwsgi's --reaper option looked like it might help me out. It > did the trick, very handy since I didn't want to wade into the > buildbot codebase. Like the manual for --reaper says "you should fix > your process spawning usage (if you can) ..." and I don't think I can. > > However, after enabling reaper I noticed that very large commit pushes > to hgweb over http would cause the process to be killed. It would > happen anytime a push of 20MB or larger was pushed up to the server. > (This is extremely rare, we just happen to have a project that carries > this much baggage). > > After a lot of reading and testing, I found that by removing the > --reaper option from uswgi, the commits would no longer be killed. I > could push up as large a bundle as I liked (+100MB). However, without > the reaper my buildbot is back to leaving zombies all over the place. > > Do any of you know more about the --reaper option, and if there is any > additional control over how it determines what a zombie process is? Or > is there is a different uwsgi option I should use? I fully realize > uwsgi is not the problem here; I blame uwsig and buildbot. But since > uwsgi is so flexible I wondered if there might be a way to have my > cake and eat it too, so to speak. > > Big thanks for any feedback. > -Andrew > > > > -- > Andrew Fischer -- Andrew Fischer LT Engineering Software http://ltengsoft.com _______________________________________________ uWSGI mailing list uWSGI@lists.unbit.it http://lists.unbit.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uwsgi
