You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by Ian Holsman <ia...@apache.org> on 2002/06/02 23:52:32 UTC
apache under linux -- restarting problems
I've just run into this, and it is present in 2.0.36..
the name-based sysvmem isn't appropiate as it will cause apache to
refuse to start when you upgrade a module (forcing a reboot)
a simple way to 'fix' is this it for the server to write out in the
error message what sharedmem segment it is trying to create so you
can ipcrm it. otherwise your forced to remove them all which is not a
good thing
Re: apache under linux -- restarting problems
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <je...@apache.org>.
On Mon, Jun 03, 2002 at 09:01:29AM -0700, Aaron Bannert wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 03, 2002 at 08:41:53AM -0700, Ian Holsman wrote:
> > the problem is that on a machine with nothing else important running on
> > it I have 5-6 shared memory segments owned by root... and I have no way
> > of identifiying which one apache is complaining about.
> >
> > was there a good reason why we switched from a anonymous name ?
>
> Unless someone speaks up I think we should change this to prefer anonymous
> mmap()-based (if available).
Which AcceptMutex value would this be? -- justin
Re: apache under linux -- restarting problems
Posted by Aaron Bannert <aa...@clove.org>.
On Mon, Jun 03, 2002 at 08:41:53AM -0700, Ian Holsman wrote:
> the problem is that on a machine with nothing else important running on
> it I have 5-6 shared memory segments owned by root... and I have no way
> of identifiying which one apache is complaining about.
>
> was there a good reason why we switched from a anonymous name ?
Unless someone speaks up I think we should change this to prefer anonymous
mmap()-based (if available).
-aaron
Re: apache under linux -- restarting problems
Posted by Aaron Bannert <aa...@clove.org>.
On Mon, Jun 03, 2002 at 08:41:53AM -0700, Ian Holsman wrote:
> the problem is that on a machine with nothing else important running on
> it I have 5-6 shared memory segments owned by root... and I have no way
> of identifiying which one apache is complaining about.
>
> was there a good reason why we switched from a anonymous name ?
Unless someone speaks up I think we should change this to prefer anonymous
mmap()-based (if available).
-aaron
Re: apache under linux -- restarting problems
Posted by Ian Holsman <ia...@apache.org>.
Aaron Bannert wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 02, 2002 at 02:52:32PM -0700, Ian Holsman wrote:
>
>>I've just run into this, and it is present in 2.0.36..
>>the name-based sysvmem isn't appropiate as it will cause apache to
>>refuse to start when you upgrade a module (forcing a reboot)
>>
>>a simple way to 'fix' is this it for the server to write out in the
>>error message what sharedmem segment it is trying to create so you
>>can ipcrm it. otherwise your forced to remove them all which is not a
>>good thing
>
>
> You shouldn't have to reboot. This also is a problem with both semaphores
> and shared memory whenver apache is not shut down cleanly. I'm not sure
> what you mean by being forced to remove all, but it would be nice if we
> could come up with a better way to deal with this situation (it seems
> to be coming up a lot recently). Perhaps ipcs/ipcrm docs aren't good
> enough?
the problem is that on a machine with nothing else important running on
it I have 5-6 shared memory segments owned by root... and I have no way
of identifiying which one apache is complaining about.
was there a good reason why we switched from a anonymous name ?
>
> -aaron
>
Re: apache under linux -- restarting problems
Posted by Aaron Bannert <aa...@clove.org>.
On Sun, Jun 02, 2002 at 02:52:32PM -0700, Ian Holsman wrote:
> I've just run into this, and it is present in 2.0.36..
> the name-based sysvmem isn't appropiate as it will cause apache to
> refuse to start when you upgrade a module (forcing a reboot)
>
> a simple way to 'fix' is this it for the server to write out in the
> error message what sharedmem segment it is trying to create so you
> can ipcrm it. otherwise your forced to remove them all which is not a
> good thing
You shouldn't have to reboot. This also is a problem with both semaphores
and shared memory whenver apache is not shut down cleanly. I'm not sure
what you mean by being forced to remove all, but it would be nice if we
could come up with a better way to deal with this situation (it seems
to be coming up a lot recently). Perhaps ipcs/ipcrm docs aren't good
enough?
-aaron