You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@httpd.apache.org by 刘孟 <li...@telemap.com.cn> on 2022/04/15 05:38:29 UTC
[users@httpd] [apache]maxconnectionsperchild problem
Hello, Mr Mentor
Recently, when using the forwarding function of Apache,
The [maxconnectionsperchild] parameter in the MPM(perfork mode) is ambiguous within the company.
During the peak hours of the company's internal servers, the number of sub processes(hpptd) of
each server is about 1000,[Maxconnectionsperchild] is currently set to 0. In order to be able to
resolve the access target regularlyIn DNS, we plan to adjust the value of [maxconnectionsperchild]
to make each child process in half a day that It can be restarted once.
My question is After setting this parameter, if it is possible that 1000 processes are arrive at the same time
resulting in service interruption?
Current server setting of [maxsparechlid = 20] and [minspareechlid = 10]
If [maxconnectionsperchild] is set, should the settings of these two values be adjusted synchronously
(the purpose is not to restart all child processes at the same time during peak service)
If there is insufficient information, please tell me.
There is my phone below, you can communicate by phone.
But I��m sorry that I just can speak Chinese or Japanese
please forgive my poor English
Best regares
Have a nice work
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
���� Liu Meng
Project Development Dept.
Tel : 010 82306399-7526 /Phone : 18500386112
������Ѹ�N�_��Ϣ���g����˾ �������к���������·���N·�����|�ϡ��ľS���¥ӥ�A��8F
Address : 8Floor,A Block,NavInfo Building, Southeast Crossing of BeiQing Rd. and YongFeng Rd., HaiDian District, Beijing��100094��
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: [users@httpd] 答复: [users@httpd] 答复: [users@httpd] [apache]maxconnectionsperchild problem
Posted by Frank Gingras <th...@apache.org>.
The event mpm is not "unstable". You likely read legacy pages that alluded
to the fact that it's still experimental. It is not. The event mpm is the
recommended mpm for production; in fact, even the ASF itself uses it!
Where did you read that, exactly?
On Mon, 25 Apr 2022 at 05:25, 刘孟 <li...@telemap.com.cn> wrote:
> Hi Frank Gingras
>
>
>
> I am sorry I missed this mail.
>
>
>
> I have got your advice and gone to study event mpm.
>
> I had study worker mpm before and very concerned about its
>
> instability in processing large volume servers and the interaction between
> threads.
>
> I don’t know if event mpm can avoid this problems but I will study it.
>
> Thank you for you advice again
>
>
>
> Best regards
>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> 刘孟 Liu Meng
>
> Project Development Dept.
>
> Tel : 010 82306399-7526 /Phone : 18500386112
>
>
>
> 北京図迅豊達信息技術有限公司 北京市海淀区北清路永豊路交差点東南 四維図新ビルA－8F
>
> Address : 8Floor,A Block,NavInfo Building, Southeast Crossing of BeiQing
> Rd. and YongFeng Rd., HaiDian District, Beijing（100094）
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> *发件人:* Frank Gingras <th...@apache.org>
> *发送时间:* 2022年4月16日 2:45
> *收件人:* users@httpd.apache.org
> *主题:* Re: [users@httpd] 答复: [users@httpd] [apache]maxconnectionsperchild
> problem
>
>
>
> Aside from the useful tuning tips, I would also caution against using
> prefork for high-volume servers. The event mpm would scale better.
>
>
>
> On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 at 09:55, Yann Ylavic <yl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 3:50 PM Yann Ylavic <yl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 2:16 PM 刘孟 <li...@telemap.com.cn> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > What I want to ask is, will these 1000 sub processes fail at the same
> time,
> > > causing my httpd serivce to stop responding.But I think you have given
> the answer
> > > >because the clients connections themselves will not have the same
> > > >lifetime (including keep-alive in between requests). In my opinion
> the risk is negligible.
> > >
> > > I think setting MaxConnectionsPerChild will lead to a slight decrease
> in the processing capacity of my server,
> > > but the possibility that all processes failed at the same time can be
> ignored.. Is my understanding correct
> >
> > Yes, and I don't think there will be a noticeable capacity change if
> > you don't set MaxConnectionsPerChild too low (the right tuning depends
> > on the number of connections per second).
> >
> > >
> > > in this way, the restart action usually occurs in the busiest period
> of the server in daytime,
> > > so I think your advice of using cron is a good suggestion. Of course,
> in order to prevent all httped services from
> > > stopping at the same time, I think I should set cron for the servers
> at different times. Is that I am in the right way?
> >
> > Yes, and ideally your DNS switches do not happen at the load peak, so
> > there should be too much processes restarted when the cron executes.
>
> "there should *not* be"
>
> >
> > >
> > > I also thank you for your suggestions on max/minspareservers. The
> adjustment of them will also be in my plan.
> > > > you probably should raise it to something more close to
> MaxRequestWorkers for efficiency.
> > >
> > > Do you mean I should adjust it to a daily peak of about 1000?
> >
> > Yes, that way at the load peak you have the full capacity of
> > processes, and after the peak they should be killed by
> > MaxConnectionsPerChild at some point (without being restarted) hence
> > move towards MinSpareservers, until the next peak..
> > So you should find the MaxConnectionsPerChild setting that does kill
>
> "that does *not* kill"
>
> > processes too often at load peak but still kills enough processes
> > after the peak (during the ramp down).
> >
> >
> > Regards;
> > Yann.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@httpd.apache.org
>
>
[users@httpd] 答复: [users@httpd] 答复: [users@httpd] [apache]maxconnectionsperchild problem
Posted by 刘孟 <li...@telemap.com.cn>.
Hi Frank Gingras
I am sorry I missed this mail.
I have got your advice and gone to study event mpm.
I had study worker mpm before and very concerned about its
instability in processing large volume servers and the interaction between threads.
I don’t know if event mpm can avoid this problems but I will study it.
Thank you for you advice again
Best regards
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
刘孟 Liu Meng
Project Development Dept.
Tel : 010 82306399-7526 /Phone : 18500386112
北京図迅豊達信息技術有限公司 北京市海淀区北清路永豊路交差点東南 四維図新ビルA－8F
Address : 8Floor,A Block,NavInfo Building, Southeast Crossing of BeiQing Rd. and YongFeng Rd., HaiDian District, Beijing（100094）
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
发件人: Frank Gingras <th...@apache.org>
发送时间: 2022年4月16日 2:45
收件人: users@httpd.apache.org
主题: Re: [users@httpd] 答复: [users@httpd] [apache]maxconnectionsperchild problem
Aside from the useful tuning tips, I would also caution against using prefork for high-volume servers. The event mpm would scale better.
On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 at 09:55, Yann Ylavic <yl...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 3:50 PM Yann Ylavic <yl...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 2:16 PM 刘孟 <li...@telemap.com.cn>> wrote:
> >
> >
> > What I want to ask is, will these 1000 sub processes fail at the same time,
> > causing my httpd serivce to stop responding.But I think you have given the answer
> > >because the clients connections themselves will not have the same
> > >lifetime (including keep-alive in between requests). In my opinion the risk is negligible.
> >
> > I think setting MaxConnectionsPerChild will lead to a slight decrease in the processing capacity of my server,
> > but the possibility that all processes failed at the same time can be ignored.. Is my understanding correct
>
> Yes, and I don't think there will be a noticeable capacity change if
> you don't set MaxConnectionsPerChild too low (the right tuning depends
> on the number of connections per second).
>
> >
> > in this way, the restart action usually occurs in the busiest period of the server in daytime,
> > so I think your advice of using cron is a good suggestion. Of course, in order to prevent all httped services from
> > stopping at the same time, I think I should set cron for the servers at different times. Is that I am in the right way?
>
> Yes, and ideally your DNS switches do not happen at the load peak, so
> there should be too much processes restarted when the cron executes.
"there should *not* be"
>
> >
> > I also thank you for your suggestions on max/minspareservers. The adjustment of them will also be in my plan.
> > > you probably should raise it to something more close to MaxRequestWorkers for efficiency.
> >
> > Do you mean I should adjust it to a daily peak of about 1000?
>
> Yes, that way at the load peak you have the full capacity of
> processes, and after the peak they should be killed by
> MaxConnectionsPerChild at some point (without being restarted) hence
> move towards MinSpareservers, until the next peak..
> So you should find the MaxConnectionsPerChild setting that does kill
"that does *not* kill"
> processes too often at load peak but still kills enough processes
> after the peak (during the ramp down).
>
>
> Regards;
> Yann.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org<ma...@httpd.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@httpd.apache.org<ma...@httpd.apache.org>
Re: [users@httpd] 答复: [users@httpd] [apache]maxconnectionsperchild problem
Posted by Frank Gingras <th...@apache.org>.
Aside from the useful tuning tips, I would also caution against using
prefork for high-volume servers. The event mpm would scale better.
On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 at 09:55, Yann Ylavic <yl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 3:50 PM Yann Ylavic <yl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 2:16 PM 刘孟 <li...@telemap.com.cn> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > What I want to ask is, will these 1000 sub processes fail at the same
> time,
> > > causing my httpd serivce to stop responding.But I think you have given
> the answer
> > > >because the clients connections themselves will not have the same
> > > >lifetime (including keep-alive in between requests). In my opinion
> the risk is negligible.
> > >
> > > I think setting MaxConnectionsPerChild will lead to a slight decrease
> in the processing capacity of my server,
> > > but the possibility that all processes failed at the same time can be
> ignored.. Is my understanding correct
> >
> > Yes, and I don't think there will be a noticeable capacity change if
> > you don't set MaxConnectionsPerChild too low (the right tuning depends
> > on the number of connections per second).
> >
> > >
> > > in this way, the restart action usually occurs in the busiest period
> of the server in daytime,
> > > so I think your advice of using cron is a good suggestion. Of course,
> in order to prevent all httped services from
> > > stopping at the same time, I think I should set cron for the servers
> at different times. Is that I am in the right way?
> >
> > Yes, and ideally your DNS switches do not happen at the load peak, so
> > there should be too much processes restarted when the cron executes.
>
> "there should *not* be"
>
> >
> > >
> > > I also thank you for your suggestions on max/minspareservers. The
> adjustment of them will also be in my plan.
> > > > you probably should raise it to something more close to
> MaxRequestWorkers for efficiency.
> > >
> > > Do you mean I should adjust it to a daily peak of about 1000?
> >
> > Yes, that way at the load peak you have the full capacity of
> > processes, and after the peak they should be killed by
> > MaxConnectionsPerChild at some point (without being restarted) hence
> > move towards MinSpareservers, until the next peak..
> > So you should find the MaxConnectionsPerChild setting that does kill
>
> "that does *not* kill"
>
> > processes too often at load peak but still kills enough processes
> > after the peak (during the ramp down).
> >
> >
> > Regards;
> > Yann.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@httpd.apache.org
>
>
Re: [users@httpd] 答复: [users@httpd] [apache]maxconnectionsperchild problem
Posted by Yann Ylavic <yl...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 3:50 PM Yann Ylavic <yl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 2:16 PM 刘孟 <li...@telemap.com.cn> wrote:
> >
> >
> > What I want to ask is, will these 1000 sub processes fail at the same time,
> > causing my httpd serivce to stop responding.But I think you have given the answer
> > >because the clients connections themselves will not have the same
> > >lifetime (including keep-alive in between requests). In my opinion the risk is negligible.
> >
> > I think setting MaxConnectionsPerChild will lead to a slight decrease in the processing capacity of my server,
> > but the possibility that all processes failed at the same time can be ignored.. Is my understanding correct
>
> Yes, and I don't think there will be a noticeable capacity change if
> you don't set MaxConnectionsPerChild too low (the right tuning depends
> on the number of connections per second).
>
> >
> > in this way, the restart action usually occurs in the busiest period of the server in daytime,
> > so I think your advice of using cron is a good suggestion. Of course, in order to prevent all httped services from
> > stopping at the same time, I think I should set cron for the servers at different times. Is that I am in the right way?
>
> Yes, and ideally your DNS switches do not happen at the load peak, so
> there should be too much processes restarted when the cron executes.
"there should *not* be"
>
> >
> > I also thank you for your suggestions on max/minspareservers. The adjustment of them will also be in my plan.
> > > you probably should raise it to something more close to MaxRequestWorkers for efficiency.
> >
> > Do you mean I should adjust it to a daily peak of about 1000?
>
> Yes, that way at the load peak you have the full capacity of
> processes, and after the peak they should be killed by
> MaxConnectionsPerChild at some point (without being restarted) hence
> move towards MinSpareservers, until the next peak..
> So you should find the MaxConnectionsPerChild setting that does kill
"that does *not* kill"
> processes too often at load peak but still kills enough processes
> after the peak (during the ramp down).
>
>
> Regards;
> Yann.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@httpd.apache.org
[users@httpd] 答复: [users@httpd] 答复: [users@httpd] [apache]maxconnectionsperchild problem
Posted by 刘孟 <li...@telemap.com.cn>.
HI, Yann
Thank you for your reply and advices.
I will try to tunning servers with your advices.
It's my first time to vist this community and very glad to
meet you who can bear my poor English.
Thank you very much again.
Best regards.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
刘孟 Liu Meng
Project Development Dept.
Tel : 010 82306399-7526 /Phone : 18500386112
北京図迅豊達信息技術有限公司 北京市海淀区北清路永豊路交差点東南 四維図新ビルA－8F
Address : 8Floor,A Block,NavInfo Building, Southeast Crossing of BeiQing Rd. and YongFeng Rd., HaiDian District, Beijing（100094）
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----邮件原件-----
发件人: Yann Ylavic <yl...@gmail.com>
发送时间: 2022年4月15日 21:51
收件人: users@httpd.apache.org
主题: Re: [users@httpd] 答复: [users@httpd] [apache]maxconnectionsperchild problem
On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 2:16 PM 刘孟 <li...@telemap.com.cn> wrote:
>
>
> What I want to ask is, will these 1000 sub processes fail at the same
> time, causing my httpd serivce to stop responding.But I think you have
> given the answer
> >because the clients connections themselves will not have the same
> >lifetime (including keep-alive in between requests). In my opinion the risk is negligible.
>
> I think setting MaxConnectionsPerChild will lead to a slight decrease
> in the processing capacity of my server, but the possibility that all
> processes failed at the same time can be ignored.. Is my understanding
> correct
Yes, and I don't think there will be a noticeable capacity change if you don't set MaxConnectionsPerChild too low (the right tuning depends on the number of connections per second).
>
> in this way, the restart action usually occurs in the busiest period
> of the server in daytime, so I think your advice of using cron is a
> good suggestion. Of course, in order to prevent all httped services from stopping at the same time, I think I should set cron for the servers at different times. Is that I am in the right way?
Yes, and ideally your DNS switches do not happen at the load peak, so there should be too much processes restarted when the cron executes.
>
> I also thank you for your suggestions on max/minspareservers. The adjustment of them will also be in my plan.
> > you probably should raise it to something more close to MaxRequestWorkers for efficiency.
>
> Do you mean I should adjust it to a daily peak of about 1000?
Yes, that way at the load peak you have the full capacity of processes, and after the peak they should be killed by MaxConnectionsPerChild at some point (without being restarted) hence move towards MinSpareservers, until the next peak..
So you should find the MaxConnectionsPerChild setting that does kill processes too often at load peak but still kills enough processes after the peak (during the ramp down).
Regards;
Yann.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: [users@httpd] 答复: [users@httpd] [apache]maxconnectionsperchild problem
Posted by Yann Ylavic <yl...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 2:16 PM 刘孟 <li...@telemap.com.cn> wrote:
>
>
> What I want to ask is, will these 1000 sub processes fail at the same time,
> causing my httpd serivce to stop responding.But I think you have given the answer
> >because the clients connections themselves will not have the same
> >lifetime (including keep-alive in between requests). In my opinion the risk is negligible.
>
> I think setting MaxConnectionsPerChild will lead to a slight decrease in the processing capacity of my server,
> but the possibility that all processes failed at the same time can be ignored.. Is my understanding correct
Yes, and I don't think there will be a noticeable capacity change if
you don't set MaxConnectionsPerChild too low (the right tuning depends
on the number of connections per second).
>
> in this way, the restart action usually occurs in the busiest period of the server in daytime,
> so I think your advice of using cron is a good suggestion. Of course, in order to prevent all httped services from
> stopping at the same time, I think I should set cron for the servers at different times. Is that I am in the right way?
Yes, and ideally your DNS switches do not happen at the load peak, so
there should be too much processes restarted when the cron executes.
>
> I also thank you for your suggestions on max/minspareservers. The adjustment of them will also be in my plan.
> > you probably should raise it to something more close to MaxRequestWorkers for efficiency.
>
> Do you mean I should adjust it to a daily peak of about 1000?
Yes, that way at the load peak you have the full capacity of
processes, and after the peak they should be killed by
MaxConnectionsPerChild at some point (without being restarted) hence
move towards MinSpareservers, until the next peak..
So you should find the MaxConnectionsPerChild setting that does kill
processes too often at load peak but still kills enough processes
after the peak (during the ramp down).
Regards;
Yann.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@httpd.apache.org
[users@httpd] 答复: [users@httpd] [apache]maxconnectionsperchild problem
Posted by 刘孟 <li...@telemap.com.cn>.
Hello,Mr Yann Ylavic
Thank you for your advice.
What I want to ask is, will these 1000 sub processes fail at the same time,
causing my httpd serivce to stop responding.But I think you have given the answer
>because the clients connections themselves will not have the same
>lifetime (including keep-alive in between requests). In my opinion the risk is negligible.
I think setting MaxConnectionsPerChild will lead to a slight decrease in the processing capacity of my server,
but the possibility that all processes failed at the same time can be ignored.. Is my understanding correct
in this way, the restart action usually occurs in the busiest period of the server in daytime,
so I think your advice of using cron is a good suggestion. Of course, in order to prevent all httped services from
stopping at the same time, I think I should set cron for the servers at different times. Is that I am in the right way?
I also thank you for your suggestions on max/minspareservers. The adjustment of them will also be in my plan.
> you probably should raise it to something more close to MaxRequestWorkers for efficiency.
Do you mean I should adjust it to a daily peak of about 1000?
Thanks for you reply again.
Best regards.
Meng
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
刘孟 Liu Meng
Project Development Dept.
Tel : 010 82306399-7526 /Phone : 18500386112
北京図迅豊達信息技術有限公司 北京市海淀区北清路永豊路交差点東南 四維図新ビルA－8F
Address : 8Floor,A Block,NavInfo Building, Southeast Crossing of BeiQing Rd. and YongFeng Rd., HaiDian District, Beijing（100094）
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----邮件原件-----
发件人: Yann Ylavic <yl...@gmail.com>
发送时间: 2022年4月15日 19:07
收件人: users@httpd.apache.org
主题: Re: [users@httpd] [apache]maxconnectionsperchild problem
Hello,
On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 7:39 AM 刘孟 <li...@telemap.com.cn>> wrote:
>
> During the peak hours of the company's internal servers, the number of
> sub processes(hpptd) of each server is about
> 1000,[Maxconnectionsperchild] is currently set to 0. In order to be
> able to resolve the access target regularlyIn DNS, we plan to adjust the value of [maxconnectionsperchild] to make each child process in half a day that It can be restarted once.
>
> My question is After setting this parameter, if it is possible that
> 1000 processes are arrive at the same time resulting in service interruption?
I suppose that you worry about 1000 processes restarting at the same time hence all issuing DNS requests (which could disrupt the DNS service)?
If so it is very unlikely that MaxConnectionsPerChild triggers at the same time on all the children processes because the clients connections themselves will not have the same lifetime (including keep-alive in between requests). In my opinion the risk is negligible.
>
> Current server setting of [maxsparechlid = 20] and [minspareechlid =
> 10] If [maxconnectionsperchild] is set, should the settings of these
> two values be adjusted synchronously
(I suppose you are referring to MaxSpareServers and MinSpareServers here)
If the peak is around 1000 connections then MaxSpareServers 20 is probably to low, if the load fluctuates a little httpd will keep stopping and recreating the processes all the peak time (there are 980 processes above the limit from its point of vue..).
I don't think MaxSpareServers is a good fit for your goal of restarting processes at least twice a day anyway, you probably should raise it to something more close to MaxRequestWorkers for efficiency.
While MaxConnectionsPerChild can help in lowering/restoring the number of processes after the peak, it's not ideal either for restarting processes in synchronization with your DNS because there can still be processes that are restarted just before the DNS have switched and they will not work until MaxConnectionsPerChild have failed..
Did you think of a cron job (or a trigger) that explicitely restart httpd (gracefuly) just after the DNS have switched?
Regards;
Yann.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org<ma...@httpd.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@httpd.apache.org<ma...@httpd.apache.org>
Re: [users@httpd] [apache]maxconnectionsperchild problem
Posted by Yann Ylavic <yl...@gmail.com>.
Hello,
On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 7:39 AM 刘孟 <li...@telemap.com.cn> wrote:
>
> During the peak hours of the company's internal servers, the number of sub processes(hpptd) of
> each server is about 1000,[Maxconnectionsperchild] is currently set to 0. In order to be able to
> resolve the access target regularlyIn DNS, we plan to adjust the value of [maxconnectionsperchild]
> to make each child process in half a day that It can be restarted once.
>
> My question is After setting this parameter, if it is possible that 1000 processes are arrive at the same time
> resulting in service interruption?
I suppose that you worry about 1000 processes restarting at the same
time hence all issuing DNS requests (which could disrupt the DNS
service)?
If so it is very unlikely that MaxConnectionsPerChild triggers at the
same time on all the children processes because the clients
connections themselves will not have the same lifetime (including
keep-alive in between requests). In my opinion the risk is negligible.
>
> Current server setting of [maxsparechlid = 20] and [minspareechlid = 10]
> If [maxconnectionsperchild] is set, should the settings of these two values be adjusted synchronously
(I suppose you are referring to MaxSpareServers and MinSpareServers here)
If the peak is around 1000 connections then MaxSpareServers 20 is
probably to low, if the load fluctuates a little httpd will keep
stopping and recreating the processes all the peak time (there are 980
processes above the limit from its point of vue..).
I don't think MaxSpareServers is a good fit for your goal of
restarting processes at least twice a day anyway, you probably should
raise it to something more close to MaxRequestWorkers for efficiency.
While MaxConnectionsPerChild can help in lowering/restoring the number
of processes after the peak, it's not ideal either for restarting
processes in synchronization with your DNS because there can still be
processes that are restarted just before the DNS have switched and
they will not work until MaxConnectionsPerChild have failed..
Did you think of a cron job (or a trigger) that explicitely restart
httpd (gracefuly) just after the DNS have switched?
Regards;
Yann.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@httpd.apache.org