[lkml]   [1996]   [Dec]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Why doesn't Apache/Stronghold like Linux 2.0.x?

Jon Lewis wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Dec 1996, David N. Cicalo wrote:
> > As suggested by another user, removing the STATS and INFO modules in
> > Apache/ Stringhold has solved the problem without making any other
> > changes. It's a simple modification in the the Makefile and a
> > recompile.
> I think you'll find that wasn't the problem. I'd been running without
> those modules and was seeing Apache 1.1.1 cease to fork and answer
> requests. I recently added both those modules so I can sort of keep an
> eye on the status. I've heard we should upgrade to 1.2b2 or that we
> should do that _and_ define BROKEN_WAIT. I'm not sure what if either will
> solve the problem. BROKEN_WAIT looks like it adds some sanity checking to
> make sure server slots don't "vanish".

Hmmm. Well I can only comment on our in house experiences which have
lead us to conclude that the STATS and INFO modules were at fault. We
will at some point try v1.2b2 in the lab but production is stable on the
current version. Could it be we're talking of two different problems?
We were experiencing the problems on a regular bassis (about 1.5 times a
day avg.) and since removing the two modules in question, we've recorded
0 incidents. It's hard for us to discredit the numbers.

-- dave
EleComm Corporation
David N. Cicalo
Systems Implementation Manager your global Linux @

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:38    [W:0.039 / U:0.848 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site