ProFTPD Server Software

http://bugs.proftpd.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2284





------- Additional Comments From tj@...  2003-11-17 12:49 -------
What configure options did you use to compile proftpd?  What does server
debugging output show?



------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

http://bugs.proftpd.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2284





------- Additional Comments From mgrice@...  2003-11-18 04:20 -------
We used --without-pam and --with-ifsession.

We couldn't use debugging output as it was in production, however I've now got
authorisation to roll back to 1.2.9 and turn on debugging, so I'll do that tonight.

Thanks for your help,
Mike



------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

http://bugs.proftpd.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2284





------- Additional Comments From mgrice@...  2003-11-18 04:21 -------
P.S., we are rolling back to the 1.2.9 built with the SUN cc.



------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

http://bugs.proftpd.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2284





------- Additional Comments From mgrice@...  2003-11-19 04:54 -------
Created an attachment (id=1941)
 --> (http://bugs.proftpd.org/attachment.cgi?id=1941&action=view)
Debug log file

We rebooted the box via console around 9AM - check the end of the logs, there's
some very esoteric error messages mentioning fd's (file descriptors?) and a
bunch of other stuff ... hope this helps.

Due to space limitations we could only fit in 8PM on the 18th to 9:20AMish on
the 19th.. but the daemon was running from about 3PM on the 18th.



------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

http://bugs.proftpd.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2284

tj@... changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Attachment #1941|application/octet-stream    |text/plain
          mime type|                            |





------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

http://bugs.proftpd.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2284

tj@... changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Attachment #1941|text/plain                  |application/octet-stream
          mime type|                            |





------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

http://bugs.proftpd.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2284





------- Additional Comments From tj@...  2003-12-02 15:11 -------
Would it be possible to try the current CVS sources?  I'm reading up on some of
the errors in the logs, but some of the changes in CVS might be relevant to what
you're seeing...



------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

http://bugs.proftpd.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2284





------- Additional Comments From ralphmengen@...  2004-02-14 04:24 -------
Maybe this is of interest:
I have six Solaris 9 (with all recommended patches) machines (5 x V120, 1 x
R280) running proftpd 1.2.9 without any problem.

The R280 has a very heavily used ftp server on it.
One V120 has a heavily used ftp server on it.
Five V120 have a moderate used ftp server on it.

... and none of them has crashed ever.

Just my $0.2.

  ++ralph

P.S.: I used --with-modules=mod_readme:mod_wrap:mod_tls:mod_ifsession



------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

http://bugs.proftpd.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2284





------- Additional Comments From tj@...  2004-05-07 13:31 -------
I think this is related to Bug #2336...



------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

http://bugs.proftpd.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2284





------- Additional Comments From proftpd@...  2004-05-16 21:06 -------
To test relatedness to Bug #2336, periodically check:

  netstat -k kmem_va_8192

If the value for `buf_total' still grows markedly and consistently, at a rate
proportional to overall FTP traffic, after 1 day of uptime, there is a good
chance you suffer from Bug #2336.

(The cache names may have changed with Solaris 9 - essentially, look for any
continually growing cache on the slab allocator).

As a guide to expected figures, for us:
- most healthy servers settle at well under 20K buffers (kmem_va_8192)
- some healthy servers (WebLogic) settle at around 30K
- anything that keeps growing for days is highly questionable.



------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

http://bugs.proftpd.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2284

tj@... changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |FIXED



------- Additional Comments From tj@...  2004-05-29 15:32 -------
I'd like to close this report.  Please reopen it if the symptoms appear again,
after having been patched for Bug #2336, so that we know it is a different bug
altogether.



------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

http://bugs.proftpd.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2284

tj@... changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|RESOLVED                    |CLOSED





------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.