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

Bug#494768: confirming that this is still a problem for apache serving from a CIFS mounts on lenny



On 03/25/2009 05:17 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote:
> I don't deny this and it is certainly not optimal, but it works as
> documented. I have poked upstream about it but I don't expect that it
> changes in the near future.

OK, fair enough.  Is there anything in an upstream bugtracker?  Should
we link these up?

Perhaps one of these upstream bugs is relevant:

https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45986
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45292

> Apache needs to be portable. Maybe sendfile's error reporting does not
> work reliable on other plattforms.

hrm, yeah, this is certainly possible.  And hard to work around :(

> dkg wrote:
>> Interestingly, when i tried experimenting with this by doing sendfile
>> from a CIFS-mounted file through a local UNIX-domain socket [0],
>> sendfile(2) returned EOVERFLOW, but the entire file transferred cleanly,
>> even for a ~5MB file.
> 
> This would show that it is not so easy to determine where to continue
> when something went wrong. Interestingly, EOVERFLOW is not a valid error
> code for sendfile according to my version of sendfile(2) :-/

Well, in this case, nothing went wrong (since the whole file was
transferred across the socket).  When i get a chance, i'll try to modify
my code to do this over a network socket instead of a UNIX socket, and
listen to it from socat on another machine to see if i can get the whole
file that way.  It seems not unlikely that the different socket domains
(AF_UNIX and AF_INET) would have different code paths in the kernel.

	--dkg

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Reply to: