Re: [squid-users] Downgrade from 3.0stable10 to 3.0stable9
Marcel Grandemange wrote: Good day. Im wondering if anybody could shed some light for me. Ive had to downgrade a machine of mine due to bugs in stable10, however since the downgrade im noticing a HELL of a lot of TCP_SWAPFAIL_MISS/200 Messages in access.log. And I do mean an extreme amount. Any ideas? Do you have the same 64/32 bit settings and --with-large-files on both builds? Amos -- Please be using Current Stable Squid 2.7.STABLE5 or 3.0.STABLE10 Current Beta Squid 3.1.0.2
Re: [squid-users] Downgrade from 3.0stable10 to 3.0stable9
On tis, 2008-11-18 at 09:47 +0200, Marcel Grandemange wrote: Good day. Im wondering if anybody could shed some light for me. Ive had to downgrade a machine of mine due to bugs in stable10, however since the downgrade im noticing a HELL of a lot of TCP_SWAPFAIL_MISS/200 Messages in access.log. And I do mean an extreme amount. Any ideas? Sounds like your swap.state has gone corrupted, maybe an old version not matching the cache content.. Is there any messages in cache.log? Regards Henrik signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [squid-users] Downgrade from 3.0stable10 to 3.0stable9
On tis, 2008-11-18 at 21:14 +1300, Amos Jeffries wrote: Do you have the same 64/32 bit settings and --with-large-files on both builds? Didn't we make the cache and swap.state format large-files independent in Squid-3? Regards Henrik signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
RE: [squid-users] Downgrade from 3.0stable10 to 3.0stable9
Good day.
Im wondering if anybody could shed some light for me.
Ive had to downgrade a machine of mine due to bugs in stable10,
however since the downgrade im noticing a HELL of a lot of
TCP_SWAPFAIL_MISS/200
Messages in access.log. And I do mean an extreme amount.
Any ideas?
Sounds like your swap.state has gone corrupted, maybe an old version not
matching the cache content..
How and why would this happen? The box hasn't been powered off in months.
Also first time something like this has happened.
So far im guesing it was upgrade to stable 10 that mucked things up.
Personally ive never had so many issues with any particular version of
squid.
Is there any messages in cache.log?
Nothing realy relavent
Closest is.
2008/11/18 09:30:04| Version 1 of swap file without LFS support detected...
2008/11/18 09:30:04| Rebuilding storage in /mnt/cache1 (DIRTY)
2008/11/18 09:30:04| Version 1 of swap file without LFS support detected...
2008/11/18 09:30:04| Rebuilding storage in /mnt/cache1 (DIRTY)
2008/11/18 09:30:10| Version 1 of swap file without LFS support detected...
2008/11/18 09:30:10| Rebuilding storage in /mnt/cache2 (DIRTY)
2008/11/18 09:30:10| Version 1 of swap file without LFS support detected...
2008/11/18 09:30:10| Rebuilding storage in /mnt/cache2 (DIRTY)
2008/11/18 09:30:10| Version 1 of swap file without LFS support detected...
2008/11/18 09:30:10| Rebuilding storage in /usr/local/squid/cache (DIRTY)
2008/11/18 09:30:10| Using Least Load store dir selection
2008/11/18 09:30:10| Set Current Directory to /usr/local/squid/cache
2008/11/18 09:30:10| Version 1 of swap file without LFS support detected...
2008/11/18 09:30:10| Rebuilding storage in /usr/local/squid/cache (DIRTY)
2008/11/18 09:30:10| Using Least Load store dir selection
2008/11/18 09:30:10| Set Current Directory to /usr/local/squid/cache
And a crap load of...
2008/11/18 11:50:02| WARNING: unparseable HTTP header field {GET
/announce?info_hash=%5d%e3G%f5%00%05%8aN%bbQ%93R%40%ab%c5%0b6U%fd%21peer_id
=-UT1800-%25.%12c%26%95%b9%cc%ce%deH%9fport=45582uploaded=15122432downloa
ded=30408704left=2564653056corrupt=1048576key=F8BA4737numwant=200compac
t=1no_peer_id=1 HTTP/1.1}
2008/11/18 11:50:26| WARNING: unparseable HTTP header field {GET
/announce?info_hash=%5d%e3G%f5%00%05%8aN%bbQ%93R%40%ab%c5%0b6U%fd%21peer_id
=-UT1800-%25.%12c%26%95%b9%cc%ce%deH%9fport=45582uploaded=15187968downloa
ded=30408704left=2564505600corrupt=1048576key=F8BA4737numwant=200compac
t=1no_peer_id=1 HTTP/1.1}
2008/11/18 11:51:47| WARNING: unparseable HTTP header field {GET
/announce?info_hash=%5d%e3G%f5%00%05%8aN%bbQ%93R%40%ab%c5%0b6U%fd%21peer_id
=-UT1800-%25.%12c%26%95%b9%cc%ce%deH%9fport=45582uploaded=15417344downloa
ded=30408704left=2563948544corrupt=1048576key=F8BA4737numwant=200compac
t=1no_peer_id=1 HTTP/1.1}
2008/11/18 11:52:36| WARNING: unparseable HTTP header field {GET
/announce?info_hash=%5d%e3G%f5%00%05%8aN%bbQ%93R%40%ab%c5%0b6U%fd%21peer_id
=-UT1800-%25.%12c%26%95%b9%cc%ce%deH%9fport=45582uploaded=15613952downloa
ded=31457280left=2563489792corrupt=1048576key=F8BA4737numwant=200compac
t=1no_peer_id=1 HTTP/1.1}
2008/11/18 11:53:11| WARNING: unparseable HTTP header field {GET
/announce?info_hash=%5d%e3G%f5%00%05%8aN%bbQ%93R%40%ab%c5%0b6U%fd%21peer_id
=-UT1800-%25.%12c%26%95%b9%cc%ce%deH%9fport=45582uploaded=15695872downloa
ded=31457280left=2563227648corrupt=1048576key=F8BA4737numwant=200compac
t=1no_peer_id=1 HTTP/1.1}
2008/11/18 11:53:45| WARNING: unparseable HTTP header field {GET
/announce?info_hash=%5d%e3G%f5%00%05%8aN%bbQ%93R%40%ab%c5%0b6U%fd%21peer_id
=-UT1800-%25.%12c%26%95%b9%cc%ce%deH%9fport=45582uploaded=1592downloa
ded=31457280left=2562965504corrupt=1048576key=F8BA4737numwant=200compac
t=1no_peer_id=1 HTTP/1.1}
2008/11/18 11:53:56| WARNING: unparseable HTTP header field {GET
/announce?info_hash=%5d%e3G%f5%00%05%8aN%bbQ%93R%40%ab%c5%0b6U%fd%21peer_id
=-UT1800-%25.%12c%26%95%b9%cc%ce%deH%9fport=45582uploaded=15826944downloa
ded=31457280left=2562883584corrupt=1048576key=F8BA4737numwant=200compac
t=1no_peer_id=1 HTTP/1.1}
2008/11/18 11:56:20| WARNING: unparseable HTTP header field {GET
/announce?info_hash=%5d%e3G%f5%00%05%8aN%bbQ%93R%40%ab%c5%0b6U%fd%21peer_id
=-UT1800-%25.%12c%26%95%b9%cc%ce%deH%9fport=45582uploaded=16171008downloa
ded=32505856left=2561425408corrupt=1048576key=F8BA4737numwant=200compac
t=1no_peer_id=1 HTTP/1.1}
2008/11/18 11:56:59| WARNING: unparseable HTTP header field {GET
/announce?info_hash=%5d%e3G%f5%00%05%8aN%bbQ%93R%40%ab%c5%0b6U%fd%21peer_id
=-UT1800-%25.%12c%26%95%b9%cc%ce%deH%9fport=45582uploaded=16302080downloa
ded=32505856left=2560999424corrupt=1048576key=F8BA4737numwant=200compac
t=1no_peer_id=1 HTTP/1.1}
2008/11/18 11:58:13| WARNING: unparseable HTTP header field {GET
/announce?info_hash=%5d%e3G%f5%00%05%8aN%bbQ%93R%40%ab%c5%0b6U%fd%21peer_id
=-UT1800-%25.%12c%26%95%b9%cc%ce%deH%9fport=45582uploaded=16531456downloa
ded=32505856left=2560655360corrupt=1048576key=F8BA4737numwant=200compac
t=1no_peer_id=1
RE: [squid-users] Downgrade from 3.0stable10 to 3.0stable9
Good day. Im wondering if anybody could shed some light for me. Ive had to downgrade a machine of mine due to bugs in stable10, however since the downgrade im noticing a HELL of a lot of TCP_SWAPFAIL_MISS/200 Messages in access.log. And I do mean an extreme amount. Any ideas? Do you have the same 64/32 bit settings and --with-large-files on both builds? Yup identical, as I used FreeBSD ports to upgrade to stable 10 and to downgrade it used the same config. Amos -- Please be using Current Stable Squid 2.7.STABLE5 or 3.0.STABLE10 Current Beta Squid 3.1.0.2
RE: [squid-users] Downgrade from 3.0stable10 to 3.0stable9
On tis, 2008-11-18 at 12:01 +0200, Marcel Grandemange wrote: How and why would this happen? The box hasn't been powered off in months. Also first time something like this has happened. So far im guesing it was upgrade to stable 10 that mucked things up. Personally ive never had so many issues with any particular version of squid. As Amos already asked, was the two versions compiled in the same manner? Regards Henrik signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [squid-users] Downgrade from 3.0stable10 to 3.0stable9
Henrik Nordstrom wrote: On tis, 2008-11-18 at 21:14 +1300, Amos Jeffries wrote: Do you have the same 64/32 bit settings and --with-large-files on both builds? Didn't we make the cache and swap.state format large-files independent in Squid-3? Not 3.0 that I know of. Certainly not different between stable9 and stable10. The only piece of s10 that touched the filesystem would have possibly reduced files being saved with negative lengths. Not added unreadable files anywhere. Amos -- Please be using Current Stable Squid 2.7.STABLE5 or 3.0.STABLE10 Current Beta Squid 3.1.0.2
RE: [squid-users] Downgrade from 3.0stable10 to 3.0stable9
How and why would this happen? The box hasn't been powered off in months. Also first time something like this has happened. So far im guesing it was upgrade to stable 10 that mucked things up. Personally ive never had so many issues with any particular version of squid. As Amos already asked, was the two versions compiled in the same manner? Yup identical, as I used FreeBSD ports to upgrade to stable 10 and to downgrade it used the same config. Regards Henrik
RE: [squid-users] Downgrade from 3.0stable10 to 3.0stable9
You might want to run make showconfig under each version of the port and verify that none of the configuration options have changed on the new version of the port. Thanks, Dean Weimer Network Administrator Orscheln Management Co -Original Message- From: Marcel Grandemange [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 6:57 AM To: 'Henrik Nordstrom' Cc: squid-users@squid-cache.org Subject: RE: [squid-users] Downgrade from 3.0stable10 to 3.0stable9 How and why would this happen? The box hasn't been powered off in months. Also first time something like this has happened. So far im guesing it was upgrade to stable 10 that mucked things up. Personally ive never had so many issues with any particular version of squid. As Amos already asked, was the two versions compiled in the same manner? Yup identical, as I used FreeBSD ports to upgrade to stable 10 and to downgrade it used the same config. Regards Henrik
[squid-users] Downgrade from 3.0stable10 to 3.0stable9
Good day. Im wondering if anybody could shed some light for me. Ive had to downgrade a machine of mine due to bugs in stable10, however since the downgrade im noticing a HELL of a lot of TCP_SWAPFAIL_MISS/200 Messages in access.log. And I do mean an extreme amount. Any ideas?
