Re: System perforamance 4.x vs. 5.x and 6.x
- From: Uwe Doering <gemini@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 01:45:26 +0100
Brett Bump wrote:
On Thu, 14 Feb 2008, Guy Helmer wrote:
Brett Bump wrote:[Thu Feb 14 09:59:23 2008] [notice] child pid 43464 exit signal Abort trap (6)Do you have a mix of modules that are both multi-threaded and
httpd in malloc(): error: recursive call
[Thu Feb 14 10:07:34 2008] [notice] child pid 85706 exit signal Abort trap (6)
httpd in free(): error: recursive call
[Thu Feb 14 10:48:39 2008] [notice] child pid 45621 exit signal Abort trap (6)
httpd in free(): error: recursive call
single-threaded loaded in Apache?
I'm not sure what else could be a root cause for this particularly nasty
problem.
Guy
Running apache_1.3.37 with php5 (about as generic as I can get). Here is
the php extensions.ini file:
extension=ctype.so
extension=dom.so
extension=ftp.so
extension=gd.so
extension=gettext.so
extension=iconv.so
extension=pcre.so
extension=zlib.so
extension=pdo.so
extension=posix.so
extension=session.so
extension=simplexml.so
extension=sqlite.so
extension=tokenizer.so
extension=xml.so
extension=xmlreader.so
extension=xmlwriter.so
extension=mysql.so
extension=imap.so
extension=sockets.so
Have you tried sorting this list alphabetically? Believe it or not, when I tried to use Apache 1.3.x with PHP 5.2.x with extensions in arbitrary order I got inexplicable crashes, too.
Now, of course it was just a coincidence that it worked for me after sorting the extension list. What this in fact points to is that the order of extensions can be important in that list, for whatever reason. For me it worked after sorting the list, but YMMV. Might be worth a try, though.
Regards,
Uwe
--
Uwe Doering | EscapeBox - Managed On-Demand UNIX Servers
gemini@xxxxxxxxxxx | http://www.escapebox.net
_______________________________________________
freebsd-performance@xxxxxxxxxxx mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx"
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: System perforamance 4.x vs. 5.x and 6.x
- From: Brett Bump
- Re: System perforamance 4.x vs. 5.x and 6.x
- From: Adrian Chadd
- Re: System perforamance 4.x vs. 5.x and 6.x
- References:
- System perforamance 4.x vs. 5.x and 6.x
- From: Brett Bump
- Re: System perforamance 4.x vs. 5.x and 6.x
- From: Kris Kennaway
- Re: System perforamance 4.x vs. 5.x and 6.x
- From: Brett Bump
- Re: System perforamance 4.x vs. 5.x and 6.x
- From: Guy Helmer
- Re: System perforamance 4.x vs. 5.x and 6.x
- From: Brett Bump
- System perforamance 4.x vs. 5.x and 6.x
- Prev by Date: Re: System perforamance 4.x vs. 5.x and 6.x
- Next by Date: Re: System perforamance 4.x vs. 5.x and 6.x
- Previous by thread: Re: System perforamance 4.x vs. 5.x and 6.x
- Next by thread: Re: System perforamance 4.x vs. 5.x and 6.x
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|