On 2006.08.17, Hossein Sharifi wrote:
> I am beginning to think it's less of a memory issue and more of a
> "something's not thread safe" issue (even though i've removed all my
> custom modules).
After what you've told me, I'm starting to agree with you.
> Now it's crashing in the tcl interpreter, and I have no idea how to get
> the underlying tcl code from that (and even if I did, it's probably not
> related to the actual cause of the issue, which is more likely heap
> corruption from a different thread).
Still ... it's worth looking at. Can you configure things so the nsd
writes a corefile when it dies? Then, give me the full stacktrace
("thread apply all backtrace" at the gdb prompt)? Email it to me
directly so not to spam the entire list, thanks.
> Since all things are otherwise equal between my FC4 and FC5 box, that
> might indicate a glibc issue or something similar. But I've found it
> difficult to link against a different glibc (since your
> bintools/gcc/kernel have to match closely, and upgrading glibc can break
> the rest of your system).
Hmm, interesting. I often upgrade gcc and/or glibc independently of the
kernel and haven't run into many issues.
> I don't use ns_server anymore, but I do use [ns_info pageroot], the
> "source" command, exec (to run imagemagick, expect scripts, and other
> things - probably 1-2 execs/second).
exec could be a problem, as Tcl's exec doesn't do a clean fork/exec, so
it does force a full process copy. If you've upgraded to AOLserver
4.5.0, you should look at pushing your exec's out into an nsproxy pool.
Dossy Shiobara | [email protected] | http://dossy.org/
Panoptic Computer Network | http://panoptic.com/
"He realized the fastest way to change is to laugh at your own
folly -- then you can let go and quickly move on." (p. 70)