Re: [squid-users] assertion failed: forward.c:109

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amos Jeffries <squid3_at_treenet.co.nz>
> To: Squid Users <squid-users_at_squid-cache.org>
> Subject: Re: [squid-users] assertion failed: forward.c:109
> Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2010 10:45:48 +1300
>
> On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 13:07:25 +0200, Thomas <proxy-tvg_at_u-solve.co.za>
> wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>> I recently installed Squid 2.7 Stable3 on a Ubuntu 8.10 Server (64-bit)
>> box. However, since about two weeks ago, the following error started
>> showing up (and it seems to appear more frequently now):
>>
>> 2010/02/17 12:06:14| squidaio_queue_request: WARNING - Queue congestion
>> 2010/02/17 12:07:49| clientTryParseRequest: FD 258 (10.55.2.104:3183)
>> Invalid Request
>> 2010/02/17 12:12:26| parseHttpRequest: Unsupported method
>> 'ü¢Ÿº‚.¬×ëX;Wã—qNe±ôÞ…x®/rð`'
>> 2010/02/17 12:12:26| clientTryParseRequest: FD 262 (172.50.3.6:2072)
>> Invalid Request
>> 2010/02/17 12:12:43| assertion failed: forward.c:109:
>> "!EBIT_TEST(e->flags, ENTRY_FWD_HDR_WAIT)"
>> 2010/02/17 12:12:46| Starting Squid Cache version 2.7.STABLE3 for
>> amd64-debian-linux-gnu...
>> 2010/02/17 12:12:46| Process ID 20045
>> 2010/02/17 12:12:46| With 8192 file descriptors available
>> 2010/02/17 12:12:46| Using epoll for the IO loop
>>
>> Google yielded a response where somebody else had a similar problem The
>> recommendation was to file a bug report.
>>
>> Now:
>> (1) Is there a fix for this available somewhere?
>> (2) This distro also features Squid3.
>>
>> Any recommendations? Remove Squid 2.7 and install 2.6 or remove 2.7 and
>> install Squid3?
>
>
> And the develpers/support first reaction is ... "please try the latest
> release and verify that it still exists". Especially if you found prior
> evidence of people reporting it.
> that means 2.7.STABLE7
>

On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 00:41:22 +0200, Thomas <proxy-tvg_at_u-solve.co.za>
wrote:
> Did I really post such a stupid question to receive such a sarcastic
> answer?
>

stupid? no.
sarcastic? I don't think so, but apologies if it came across that way.

lets try that again.

Please try 2.7.STABLE7. Simply because its the currently supported release
from the version series you are already using. The snapshot pre-STABLE8 may
be an even better test, with more bug fixes in it.
The google search result you found indicates that it is a known problem. I
believe it's resolved in some releases, though off the top of my head I'm
not certain if its in 2.7 already.

If the current 2.7 and snapshot does not solve it either, then will be the
time to try release from the 3.x series (or if you just want an excuse to
try the 3.x, feel free).

Amos
Received on Thu Feb 18 2010 - 00:37:31 MST