Ok, correct me if I got this wrong. This issue seems to boil down to multiple fcntl use in a threaded fashion on Solaris. If we can ensure that if we only ever use fcntl in one location, then it seems that it would not be an issue. Alternatively, we can try and ensure that we just do not use the default mutex of fcntl. Is this correct? -----Original Message----- From: Eric Covener [mailto:covener@xxxxxxxxx] Sent: Friday, 12 December 2008 10:28 AM To: users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: Apache 2.2.10 - Solaris 10 - Under Load - Failed to acquire SSL session cache lock On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 6:17 PM, Ong, Lawrence K <Lawrence.K.Ong@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi All, > > We are currently getting a lot of warnings in our logs in regards to > deadlock, and I am wondering if anyone have experienced seen the following. > > Under load, we would get: > > [Fri Dec 12 08:50:23 2008] [warn] (45)Deadlock situation detected/avoided: > Failed to acquire SSL session cache lock [Fri Dec 12 08:50:39 2008] > [warn] (45)Deadlock situation detected/avoided: > Failed to acquire SSL session cache lock > > We have already set up SSLMutex and SSLSessionCache with the following: > > SSLSessionCache shm:/usr/local/apache2/logs/ssl_gcache_data(512000) > SSLMutex file:/usr/local/apache2/logs/ssl_mutex Look for a thread titled "fcntl based mutex on Solaris/EM64TLink to this message" on google. It's not resolved because there is no reasonable default (AIUI). You might be able to change the AcceptMutex and it would get you down to only 1 fcntl-based mutex. -- Eric Covener covener@xxxxxxxxx --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|