Thanks. I think the idea of sending a useless signal is the best so far. I'm also going to upgrade my kernel and see if I can get more meaningful output from ps.
btw, is anyone using the 2.6 kernel on live servers yet? On Sun, 2004-02-29 at 12:50, Render Web wrote: > Mark Maunder wrote: > > I've considered it, but I have a few other processes that I'd like to > > swap out when they're inactive to increase disk cache etc. btw, I've > > managed to lock mysql into memory on the server using the memlock config > > option which uses mlockall. I've googled myself to death but can't find > > anything about mlock and apache. > > altavista gave me this > > http://www.itworld.com/nl/lnx_tip/05182001/ > > I have not tried it but one trick would be to create > a process that locks memeory then execs apache into the alloced > memory space. Somehow I hope/doubt this would not work but i > may be worth a try as a "workaround" :-) > > A quick grep of the most recent (cvs update as of 29/feb 12:43) > apache2/mp2 source shows no ocurrences of 'mlock'. > > Note that it should not be too difficult to add however > it would make more sense to upgrade apache to a RT process > if this is your objective. > > Another option would be to install an SSD as swap device. > This does make linux (and Cray's) go like greased weasel stuff > and as memory costs are low, should not be an expensive option. > > Whatever you decide to do , keep us informed- I for one am > interested in how you solve the problem as I would with > large AP2/MP2 apps and swap can be a problem for me as well. > > Jacqui > -- Report problems: http://perl.apache.org/bugs/ Mail list info: http://perl.apache.org/maillist/modperl.html List etiquette: http://perl.apache.org/maillist/email-etiquette.html
