Actually, I did search through the archives for log rotation and memory leaks, but was
not able to find any information specifically linking memory issues to log rotation.
If it were not for all the helpful people on this list, I wouldn't have known about
all the options I have to minimize the adverse effects of this bug.
Some on this list even suggested that I was the only person suffering this issue, but
evidently this is not so. Since I've just subscribed to the list, I wouldn't have any
knowledge of your previous posts, which most assuredly would have helped me.
I don't think it's an issue of RedHat, or any other distribution, not providing enough
documentation that's the issue here. I just feel that many people could benefit from
the inclusion of a warning about mod_perl, DSO & Apache in the location that the
Apache Group maintains for this on their website "Apache 1.3 Dynamic Shared Object
(DSO) Support [http://www.apache.org/docs/dso.html]." It certainly can't hurt,
and is were most people would logically go for information.
Let's face it, many people who purchase a major distribution probably aren't going to
use mod_perl; consequently, the vendors may not even be aware of any issues. The
knowledge base of the contributors to this list can help many people, especially on
this issue, because everyone has to rotate logs sooner or later. From the responses to
this particular issue we have seen that quite a few people have had the same
experience, even when mod_perl is compiled statically in Apache.
Addressing an issue openly, thoroughly, quickly and responsibly is what separates open
source projects from our poor, closed source brethren.
If anyone feels offended or slighted by my somewhat ineloquent, or poorly considered
posts, you have my sincerest apologies. Life is too short for conflict.
I think this post has gone on a bit too long, and sapped too much time from everyone's
schedule, so I'd like to end it now so that you all can get back to more productive
endeavors.
I'd like to thank everyone who helped me out, especially the following: Jens-Uwe Mager
for pointing out the source of the issue; Christian Gilmore for the rotation scripts;
G.W. Haywood for the perls of wisdom; Gunther Birznieks for yet another option;
Ri?ardas ?epas for the piped rotatelogs program suggestion, and Roger Espel Llima for
pointing out that the same issue exists with mod_perl compiled statically.
Have a great Day!
Douglas Leonard wrote:
>
> First off, the complaint about the lack of documentation for DSO being
> experimental is a bit offbase IMO. It isn't up to the mod_perl group to
> make sure RedHat includes complete documentation in their build of
> mod_perl.
>
> Also, this issue has been talked about many times on this mailing list.
> Sometime after mod_perl 1.20 was released there was talk that the DSO
> problems had been fixed. I can remember putting out a post myself on
> exactly how to cause the process size to grow using HUP or USR1 when using
> mod_perl 1.21 and 1.22-dev in order to disprove this. It is always best
> to check one of the archives first for this kind of problem IMO.
>
> I find it best to do a daily staggered shutdown/restart of each apache
> server and rotate the logs via a custom script. One minute of downtime
> per server per day isn't exactly noticeable when you have a load balancing
> system set up.
>
> On Tue, 7 Nov 2000, Buddy Lee Haystack wrote:
>
> >
> > Thanks, but as a RedHat [or other typical major distribution] user, I
> > would never see the documentation you mentioned below. Since DSO is
> > still experimental, would it not be an absolute necessity to include
> > that information in the location where most users are directed to look
> > for information about all things Apache? The first place I go to look
> > for information is on the online documentation, and I know that the
> > "experimental" nature of using DSO is not mentioned anywhere in
> > "Apache 1.3 Dynamic Shared Object (DSO)
> > Support" [http://www.apache.org/docs/dso.html].
> >
> > It appears as if the "experimental" nature of DSO's under Apache is
> > fairly well removed from view.
> >
> > Had the information you included below been clearly listed on Apache's
> > website, in the proper location, many people would have made a choice
> > not to use DSO. It appears as if the Apache Group has been a little
> > less than candid in Apache's true support for DSO.
> >
> > IMHO There really needs to be a warning in the documentation on their
> > website explicitly stating the info you've included below.
> >
> <snip>
>
> --
> <Douglas Leonard>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
BLH
www.RentZone.org
