Public bug reported:
Binary package hint: stompserver
The stompserver init script (at least in 10.04) can use the STARTTIME
variable as a delay after starting before testing if stomp is started. I
discovered sporadic failures from the init script and found that setting
STARTTIME fixed it. Only
Awesome, I thought I had fixed it previously but have noticed it's still
happening and causing some failed puppet runs.
--
[SRU] client sent HTTP/1.1 request without hostname (see RFC2616 section 14.23)
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/589611
You received this bug notification because you are a
Awesome, I thought I had fixed it previously but have noticed it's still
happening and causing some failed puppet runs.
--
[SRU] client sent HTTP/1.1 request without hostname (see RFC2616 section 14.23)
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/589611
You received this bug notification because you are a
Just to chime in, this is affecting my 10.04 LTS nodes talking to my
recently upgraded 10.04 LTS puppet master. Puppet sits behind Apache
with mod_proxy_balancer and mod_ssl. I disabled reqtimeout and have yet
to see this re-appear.
--
client sent HTTP/1.1 request without hostname (see RFC2616
Just to chime in, this is affecting my 10.04 LTS nodes talking to my
recently upgraded 10.04 LTS puppet master. Puppet sits behind Apache
with mod_proxy_balancer and mod_ssl. I disabled reqtimeout and have yet
to see this re-appear.
--
client sent HTTP/1.1 request without hostname (see RFC2616
Public bug reported:
Binary package hint: collectd
Description:Ubuntu 10.04.1 LTS
Release:10.04
collectd:
Installed: 4.8.2-1
Candidate: 4.8.2-1
Version table:
*** 4.8.2-1 0
500 http://aptproxy/ubuntu/ lucid/universe Packages
100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
I expect
Chuck, you're thinking this is that Debian bug that had an advisory last
week right?
--
Slow memory leak, seen on two machines, appears to be dupe of 224945 even after
-updates
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/422138
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server
Chuck, you're thinking this is that Debian bug that had an advisory last
week right?
--
Slow memory leak, seen on two machines, appears to be dupe of 224945 even after
-updates
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/422138
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs,
attention
to the issue.
--
Joe McDonagh
Operations Engineer
Silent Penguin Services
AIM: YoosingYoonickz
IRC: joe-mac on freenode
www.colonfail.com
--
Slow memory leak, seen on two machines, appears to be dupe of 224945 even after
-updates
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/422138
You received
attention
to the issue.
--
Joe McDonagh
Operations Engineer
Silent Penguin Services
AIM: YoosingYoonickz
IRC: joe-mac on freenode
www.colonfail.com
--
Slow memory leak, seen on two machines, appears to be dupe of 224945 even after
-updates
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/422138
You received
I stopped seeing that problem roughly a year ago, shortly after this.
The package seemed to be pretty rough around the edges at the time.
--
puppetmasterd and puppetd on the same box causing problems
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/271500
You received this bug notification because you are a
Chuck Short wrote:
@Joe:
Its marked Low so our qa scripts pick it up. Ill take a look at this
again after karmic has been released.
Regards
chuck
Ah, ok, cool. Thanks Chuck.
--
Slow memory leak, seen on two machines, appears to be dupe of 224945 even after
-updates
Chuck Short wrote:
@Joe:
Its marked Low so our qa scripts pick it up. Ill take a look at this
again after karmic has been released.
Regards
chuck
Ah, ok, cool. Thanks Chuck.
--
Slow memory leak, seen on two machines, appears to be dupe of 224945 even after
-updates
Chuck Short wrote:
** Changed in: apache2 (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided = Low
Chuck, was wondering, should this be marked Low from Undecided if it
hasn't been confirmed nor denied by anyone?
--
Joe McDonagh
Operations Engineer
www.colonfail.com
--
Slow memory leak, seen on two
Chuck Short wrote:
** Changed in: apache2 (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided = Low
Chuck, was wondering, should this be marked Low from Undecided if it
hasn't been confirmed nor denied by anyone?
--
Joe McDonagh
Operations Engineer
www.colonfail.com
--
Slow memory leak, seen on two
Stefan, thanks for re-iterating the MaxRequestsPerChild tidbit, I had
forgotten that option was for lifetime, not concurrency. That'll
probably help workaround momentarily.
Also, I am not currently doing any tweaking wrt the SSLSessionCache, I
recall messing with it when I first started seeing
Stefan, thanks for re-iterating the MaxRequestsPerChild tidbit, I had
forgotten that option was for lifetime, not concurrency. That'll
probably help workaround momentarily.
Also, I am not currently doing any tweaking wrt the SSLSessionCache, I
recall messing with it when I first started seeing
right?
--
Joe McDonagh
Operations Engineer
www.colonfail.com
--
Slow memory leak, seen on two machines, appears to be dupe of 224945 even after
-updates
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/422138
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu
This took down a box today, had to visit the DC for it... is there any
more information-gathering I can do for you or myself here?
--
Slow memory leak, seen on two machines, appears to be dupe of 224945 even after
-updates
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/422138
You received this bug
This took down a box today, had to visit the DC for it... is there any
more information-gathering I can do for you or myself here?
--
Slow memory leak, seen on two machines, appears to be dupe of 224945 even after
-updates
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/422138
You received this bug
Chuck, is there anything else you need from me to promote this from
incomplete?
--
Slow memory leak, seen on two machines, appears to be dupe of 224945 even after
-updates
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/422138
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team,
Chuck, is there anything else you need from me to promote this from
incomplete?
--
Slow memory leak, seen on two machines, appears to be dupe of 224945 even after
-updates
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/422138
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is
Hey Chuck, thanks for the response. The command is:
ab -n 200 -c 100 -f TLS11 https://webserver/
At ten seconds:
30253 www-data 20 0 254m 75m 4432 S 31 0.5 0:03.50 apache2
30252 www-data 20 0 251m 72m 4464 S 30 0.4 0:03.34 apache2
30250 www-data
I can't be the only person seeing this bug:
28015 jmcdonag 20 0 42.3g 1.2g 16m S4 32.5 14:28.80 rhythmbox
I just watched it ask for approximately 100 MB per every two seconds...
All I have to do is let rhythmbox stay open for a while. Is there some
way I can run it in debug mode and
Hey Chuck, thanks for the response. The command is:
ab -n 200 -c 100 -f TLS11 https://webserver/
At ten seconds:
30253 www-data 20 0 254m 75m 4432 S 31 0.5 0:03.50 apache2
30252 www-data 20 0 251m 72m 4464 S 30 0.4 0:03.34 apache2
30250 www-data
Sorry forgot to attach the output of AB after I killed it:
ab -n 200 -c 100 -f TLS11 https://scan-stag.osdc/
This is ApacheBench, Version 2.3 $Revision: 655654 $
Copyright 1996 Adam Twiss, Zeus Technology Ltd, http://www.zeustech.net/
Licensed to The Apache Software Foundation,
Public bug reported:
Binary package hint: apache2
1. Ubuntu Release Info:
Description:Ubuntu 8.04.3 LTS
Release:8.04
2. Package Information:
apache2-mpm-prefork:
Installed: 2.2.8-1ubuntu0.11
Candidate: 2.2.8-1ubuntu0.11
Version table:
*** 2.2.8-1ubuntu0.11 0
500
This is reproducible on my machine just by leaving RhythmBox open for a
long period of time. One day when it was on for a couple weeks it had
something like 100GB VIRT, resident was pretty high most of my RAM was
taken by it and tons of swapping was happening. On this machine I have a
somewhat
Public bug reported:
Binary package hint: apache2
1. Ubuntu Release Info:
Description:Ubuntu 8.04.3 LTS
Release:8.04
2. Package Information:
apache2-mpm-prefork:
Installed: 2.2.8-1ubuntu0.11
Candidate: 2.2.8-1ubuntu0.11
Version table:
*** 2.2.8-1ubuntu0.11 0
500
Public bug reported:
Description:Ubuntu 8.10
Release:8.10
firefox:
Installed: 3.0.5+nobinonly-0ubuntu0.8.10.1
Candidate: 3.0.5+nobinonly-0ubuntu0.8.10.1
Version table:
*** 3.0.5+nobinonly-0ubuntu0.8.10.1 0
500 http://us.archive.ubuntu.com intrepid-updates/main Packages
BTW, I am on a 64 bit OS.
--
Enter key does not POST in forms in certain case
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/326230
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
Public bug reported:
Description:Ubuntu 8.04.2
Release:8.04
apache2.2-common 2.2.8-1ubuntu0.3
What I expect to happen: When running apache2ctl status, I expect that
an error such as connection refused will cause the script to exit with
a !0 return code.
What happens instead:
I revisited this today and I didn't accurately describe the problem in
the title. Conceptually it seems correct BUT the code in puppetmasterd
does import code from puppet. That being said, the real problem is
running puppetmasterd and puppetd on the same box, as in the box is a
client to itself.
Public bug reported:
The puppetmaster package if installed from apt drags down puppet. This
is not only unnecessary but it borks the permissions of
/var/lib/puppet... to the package maintainer:
puppetd runs as root because it does the actual changing of config files
puppetmasterd runs as user
34 matches
Mail list logo
