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 >