DO NOT REPLY [Bug 8165] - weird: 100% cpu usage after a simple single ssl connection

2002-04-16 Thread bugzilla 
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG 
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND 
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8165

weird: 100% cpu usage after a simple single ssl connection

[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED



--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2002-04-16 22:09 ---
Chances are this is related to a fix that's already been committed (by Doug 
MacEachern) for 2.0.36. 
 
The patch is: 
 
http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/httpd-2.0/modules/ssl/ssl_engine_io.c.diff?r1=1.72&r2=1.73
 
 
Thanks for using Apache!

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 8165] - weird: 100% cpu usage after a simple single ssl connection

2002-04-17 Thread bugzilla 
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG 
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND 
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8165

weird: 100% cpu usage after a simple single ssl connection

[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|RESOLVED|CLOSED



--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2002-04-17 00:32 ---
Correct, that patch fixed this behaviour here. Thanks!

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 8165] - weird: 100% cpu usage after a simple single ssl connection

2002-04-30 Thread bugzilla 
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG 
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND 
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8165

weird: 100% cpu usage after a simple single ssl connection

[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED]



--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2002-04-30 18:19 ---
*** Bug 8671 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***