Re: System perforamance 4.x vs. 5.x and 6.x
- From: Ivan Voras <ivoras@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2008 14:55:52 +0100
Bill Moran wrote:
In response to Brett Bump <bbump@xxxxxxxx>:
I'm seeing signal 6's on apache and imapd (never happened before)
network errors, serious response time errors and generally poor
performance during peak activity (same box, same people).
IIRC, signal 6 is an indicator that you've compiled binaries that are
almost, but not quite compatible with your CPU.
You probably mean signals 4 (SIGILL) or 10 (SIGBUS), rather than 6
(SIGABRT) :)
I was getting a lot of SIGABRTs once, but that turned out to be due to
PHP module order bogosity and linking mismatched threaded libraries into
apache.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: System perforamance 4.x vs. 5.x and 6.x
- From: Bill Moran
- 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: Bill Moran
- System perforamance 4.x vs. 5.x and 6.x
- Prev by Date: Re: Bad performance of 7.0 nfs client with Solaris nfs server
- 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
|
|