You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@httpd.apache.org by Wee Teck Neo <sl...@msn.com> on 2003/11/02 11:59:50 UTC
Re: [users@httpd] Worker MPM
I tried using
AcceptMutex flock
[Sat Nov 01 02:14:26 2003] [notice] Apache/2.0.48 (Unix) configured --
resuming normal operations
[Sat Nov 01 02:14:26 2003] [info] Server built: Oct 31 2003 05:58:05
[Sat Nov 01 02:14:26 2003] [debug] worker.c(1733): AcceptMutex: flock
(default: sysvsem)
[Sat Nov 01 02:14:45 2003] [notice] SIGUSR1 received. Doing graceful
restart
[Sat Nov 01 02:14:45 2003] [notice] Apache/2.0.48 (Unix) configured --
resuming normal operations
[Sat Nov 01 02:14:45 2003] [info] Server built: Oct 31 2003 05:58:05
[Sat Nov 01 02:14:45 2003] [debug] worker.c(1733): AcceptMutex: flock
(default: sysvsem)
No errors.
Any difference btween the 2 types of Mutex? Will it affects any performance?
----Original Message Follows----
From: Joshua Slive <jo...@slive.ca>
Reply-To: users@httpd.apache.org
To: users@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: [users@httpd] Worker MPM
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 12:06:03 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
On Fri, 31 Oct 2003, Wee Teck Neo wrote:
> I'm running on RedHat 9
>
> Kernel 2.4.22
>
> [Fri Oct 31 17:24:29 2003] [debug] worker.c(1733): AcceptMutex: sysvsem
> (default: sysvsem)
>
>
> After giving it a kill -USR1
>
> [Fri Oct 31 17:25:41 2003] [notice] SIGUSR1 received. Doing graceful
> restart
> [Fri Oct 31 17:25:41 2003] [emerg] (22)Invalid argument:
> apr_proc_mutex_unlock failed. Attempting to shutdown process gracefully.
> [Fri Oct 31 17:25:41 2003] [notice] Apache/2.0.48 (Unix) PHP/4.3.3
> configured -- resuming normal operations
> [Fri Oct 31 17:25:41 2003] [info] Server built: Oct 31 2003 05:58:05
> [Fri Oct 31 17:25:41 2003] [debug] worker.c(1733): AcceptMutex: sysvsem
> (default: sysvsem)
>
> Apache 2.0.48
I'd need to look into the code to track this down. Is it causing any bad
effects, or are you just concerned about the error message? Have you
tried setting AcceptMutex to somthing besides sysvsem?
Joshua.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The official User-To-User support forum of the Apache HTTP Server Project.
See <URL:http://httpd.apache.org/userslist.html> for more info.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
" from the digest: users-digest-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@httpd.apache.org
_________________________________________________________________
Keep track of Singapore & Malaysia stock prices.
http://www.msn.com.sg/money/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The official User-To-User support forum of the Apache HTTP Server Project.
See <URL:http://httpd.apache.org/userslist.html> for more info.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
" from the digest: users-digest-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: [users@httpd] Worker MPM
Posted by Joshua Slive <jo...@slive.ca>.
On Sun, 2 Nov 2003, Wee Teck Neo wrote:
> I tried using
> AcceptMutex flock
> No errors.
>
> Any difference btween the 2 types of Mutex? Will it affects any performance?
Maybe.
Sorry, but accept mutexes are an incredibly complex issue, and which is
fastest will vary with OS/hardware/load characteristics/etc. Some
information is at
http://httpd.apache.org/docs-2.0/misc/perf-tuning.html#compiletime
Joshua.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The official User-To-User support forum of the Apache HTTP Server Project.
See <URL:http://httpd.apache.org/userslist.html> for more info.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
" from the digest: users-digest-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@httpd.apache.org