Thanks a lot. I send to a wrong email address last time. Where is the lastest epoll patch that solved the "epoll_ctl(EPOLL_CTL_DEL): failed on fd=197" problem? Is it in squid src tagged with epoll-2.5 in squid CVS? Or, is it in the patch from http://devel.squid-cache.org/cgi-bin/diff2/epoll-2_5.patch?s2_5? sally On 5/11/05, Steven Wilton <swilton@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I did manage to trace the cause of the "epoll_ctl(EPOLL_CTL_DEL): failed on > fd=197" messages. The latest epoll patch fixes this problem. > > There are 2 messages that the new patch will cause to appear with the > default debug options (ALL,1): > > storeClientCopy3: <url> - clearing ENTRY_DEFER_READ > > This is caused when an object has been deferred, and for some reason the > memory has not been freed, even though all clients have seen all in-memory > parts of the url. I can't see why this would be the case, and I'm sure it's > not caused by the epoll code, but the epoll code needs to catch this > condition. > > WARNING defer handler for fd=<fd>(<url>) does not call commDeferFD() - > backing off manually. > > This is caused when an object has data ready to be read, and the defer > handler reports that the read should be deferred, but does not tell the > epoll code to back off. This debug would probably be very noisy if used > with delay pools, but other than that it indicates a non-optimised defer > handler. > > These two debug statements do not produce a large number of entries in the > debug logs (181 and 52 messages respectively out of 3204 messages total in > one of our proxy server's cache.log out of a total of ~4.2 million > requests). The proxy server does handle these cases appropriately, but they > indicate sub-optimal performance. As they represent a tiny fraction of the > total number of requests, I have not spent any time working out the exact > cause of these problems. > > Regards > Steven > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Sally Huang [mailto:sallyhsl@xxxxxxxxx] > > Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2005 9:34 AM > > To: Henrik Nordstrom > > Cc: squid-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > Subject: Re: Odp: Re: [squid-users] how to apply epoll-2_5 > > patch to squid2.5-stable9 > > > > Thanks for your clarify. > > > > The author doesn't reply me. Could you pls do me a favor and check > > with the author whether he has updated the latest epoll patch so that > > everyone won't face this "epoll_ctl(EPOLL_CTL_DEL): failed on fd=197" > > problem? > > > > Regards, > > sally > > > > > > On 5/10/05, Henrik Nordstrom <hno@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Tue, 10 May 2005, Sally Huang wrote: > > > > > > > Do you mean the " epoll_ctl(EPOLL_CTL_DEL): failed on fd=197" bug > > > > isalready fixed on both epoll-2_5 patch and epoll-2.5 branch in > > > > squidCVS? > > > > > > I am the wrong person to answer that question, but as you I > > remember the > > > branch author mentioning that there has been fixes in that area. > > > > > > I answerd to the question how you could get the latest > > version of the > > > epoll branch. > > > > > > Regards > > > Henrik > > > > > > > -- > > No virus found in this incoming message. > > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. > > Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.8 - Release Date: 5/10/2005 > > > > > > -- > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. > Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.8 - Release Date: 5/10/2005 > >
