Here is further confirmation that it leaks like crazy for:
mod_python 3.2.10, Linux Ubuntu 6.06, Apache 2.0.55 (mpm-worker), Python
2.4.3
Jim
Graham Dumpleton wrote:
> I get it on Apache 2.0.59 as well. :-(
>
> I will thus be interested to see what others get, as appears to be an existing
> mod_python issue.
>
> BTW, this is with worker MPM.
>
> Graham
>
> Graham Dumpleton wrote ..
>> I am using Apache 2.2.2 and when using mod_python in a certain way, I am
>> seeing
>> significant ongoing increases in memory use by Apache child processes.
>> Initially I thought I had stuffed up recent changes in mod_python 3.3 out
>> of
>> subversion trunk that I had been making, but I went back to mod_python
>> 3.2.10
>> and am seeing the same problem.
>>
>> Can some one please run the following test and use "top" or some other
>> means of
>> monitoring memory use to see if you can duplicate the problem. The test
>> is really
>> quite simple actually.
>>
>> # .htaccess
>>
>> PythonFixupHandler handlers
>> AddHandler mod_python .py
>> PythonHandler handlers
>>
>> # handlers.py
>>
>> from mod_python import apache
>>
>> def handler(req):
>> req.content_type = 'text/plain'
>> req.write('handler')
>> return apache.OK
>>
>> def fixuphandler(req):
>> return apache.OK
>>
>> The command I have been using to test is:
>>
>> ab -c 1 -n 5000 http://localhost:8082/~grahamd/MODPYTHON-155/hello.py
>>
>> What is strange is that if I have only the fixup handler or response handler
>> invoked and not both, then memory leak isn't present. It is only when both
>> are
>> being invoked that it leaks memory.
>>
>> This occurs for me on Mac OS X 10.4, Python 2.3.5 and Apache 2.2.2, with
>> either mod_python 3.2.10 or mod_python 3.3. I haven't yet tested with older
>> Apache 2.0.58 as yet as don't have it on my box at present, but will download
>> it and see if that makes a difference.
>>
>> I guess what I am trying to working out is if this is an issue with Apache
>> 2.2.2
>> or whether it is mod_python and problem has been there for a while. Thus
>> if
>> people with both Apache 2.0.X and Apache 2.2.X could test it it would be
>> great.
>>
>> Any help appreciated.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Graham
>
