[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#423653: apache2.2-common: mod_disk_cache fills /var after etch upgrade

Package: apache2.2-common
Version: 2.2.3-4
Severity: critical
Justification: breaks unrelated software

After an upgrade to etch, mod_disk_cache started storing things in 
/var/cache/apache2/mod_disk_cache, without any apparently limit on size. 
This caused /var to fill up, which had bad effects on the entire system.

I am not sure if mod_disk_cache was enabled or not before the upgrade to 
etch (from sarge), but it was certainly not using disk space in the same 

The problem appears to be related to having mod_proxy enabled at upgrade 
time, according to bug #407171

It is not entirely clear to me from that bug description whether 
mod_disk_cache was previously enabled but in a different way, or if it 
is newly enabled by the upgrade.

mod_disk_cache appears to be experimental 
(http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.0/mod/mod_disk_cache.html), and also the 
"garbage collection" features that would be necesary to keep the disk 
cache to a fixed bound are not yet implemented. Disabling it seems not 
to have caused any problems, even for mod_proxy.

Someone else seems to have noticed this problem too:

-- System Information:
Debian Release: 4.0
  APT prefers stable
  APT policy: (600, 'stable')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Shell:  /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
Kernel: Linux 2.6.18-4-686
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C (charmap=ANSI_X3.4-1968)

Versions of packages apache2.2-common depends on:
ii  apache2-utils                2.2.3-4     utility programs for webservers
ii  libmagic1                    4.17-5etch1 File type determination library us
ii  lsb-base                     3.1-23.1    Linux Standard Base 3.1 init scrip
ii  mime-support                 3.39-1      MIME files 'mime.types' & 'mailcap
ii  net-tools                    1.60-17     The NET-3 networking toolkit
ii  procps                       1:3.2.7-3   /proc file system utilities

apache2.2-common recommends no packages.

-- no debconf information

Reply to: