Hi All, I'm using LUSCA_HEAD-r14756 on an ISP network with about 3000 users. I tested squid-2.7-stable7 and had the same error. Everything is great, except that once in a while (ie. 2, 3 times a week) Lusca dies and I get this assertion failed in the COSS code: "-1 != sio->swap_filen" Now, looking at the code in fs/coss/store_io_coss.c, I saw this: sio->swap_filen = storeCossAllocate(SD, e, COSS_ALLOC_ALLOCATE); The code of storeCossAllocate actually can return -1 in several paths...so I'm wondering why lusca aborts on it, rather than returning an error. Since the COSS rebuild takes about an hour, the ISP takes a bandwidth blow to the head everytime this happens. Any clue why and how can it be fixed? My cache_dir setup is like this: cache_dir aufs /cache 69775 60 500 min-size=1048576 cache_dir coss /coss1 65520 max-size=1048575 max-stripe-waste=32768 block-size=4096 maxfullbufs=20 cache_dir coss /coss2 65520 max-size=1048575 max-stripe-waste=32768 block-size=4096 maxfullbufs=20 cache_dir coss /coss3 65520 max-size=1048575 max-stripe-waste=32768 block-size=4096 maxfullbufs=20 I don't have that much more on my logs, but if there's any info I can provide you, I can try and dig it up. Thanks for your help. I saw the the aufs code returns NULL instead of sio if some part doesn't work, so I change from: assert (-1 != sio->swap_filen); to if (-1 == sio->swap_filen) return NULL; This opened a memory leak, but it's better than squid crashing. But it didn't work either. I got "FATAL: Received Segment Violation...dying" this morning. Should I maybe test assign storeCossAllocate to a temporary variable and only create the sio if that temporary variable is not -1? Would this work? I don't get why both squid and lusca are crashing from this change, though. Cheers, - Robert
