Bug#657335: marked as done (It'd be cool to have APACHE_ULIMIT_MAX_FILES self-documented in the envvars file)
Your message dated Fri, 27 Jan 2012 02:14:39 +0100
with message-id <4F21FA7F.5060407@toell.net>
and subject line Re: Bug#657335: It'd be cool to have APACHE_ULIMIT_MAX_FILES self-documented in the envvars file
has caused the Debian Bug report #657335,
regarding It'd be cool to have APACHE_ULIMIT_MAX_FILES self-documented in the envvars file
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)
--
657335: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=657335
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: apache2.2-common
Severity: wishlist
Hi,
When you run with *a lot* of sites on a single server, it might be quite
hard to understand how to cope with it.
To save the user a lot of googling, I'd suggest to add what's below
in the /etc/apache2/envvars file:
# If you have a large Apache setup, with a lot of websites running on
# your server, you might need to uncomment the below directive so that
# apache can access more files than what your system allows by default.
#export APACHE_ULIMIT_MAX_FILES="ulimit -n 8192"
Feel free to use a better comment if you wish though.
Cheers,
Thomas Goirand (zigo)
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
fixed 657335 2.2.17-2
thanks
Hello Thomas,
> # If you have a large Apache setup, with a lot of websites running on
> # your server, you might need to uncomment the below directive so that
> # apache can access more files than what your system allows by default.
> #export APACHE_ULIMIT_MAX_FILES="ulimit -n 8192"
we did just that in Apache2 2.2.17-2, available in Wheezy and later.
Sorry, I forgot to check that when asking you to file this bug.
Hence I am closing this bug.
- --
with kind regards,
Arno Töll
IRC: daemonkeeper on Freenode/OFTC
GnuPG Key-ID: 0x9D80F36D
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/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=wtB0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--- End Message ---
Reply to: