Re: Error/ Warning messages in log files (OS 121) and (OS 64)

David, Thanks for your reply however, I have been here before and can only find others with the same problem, and no resolution (i.e. http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21425) Still looking for a fix Trevor "David Robley" <robleyd@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message news:MPG.1a668097f27ccc35989849@news.php.net... > In article <20040106112347.6124.qmail@pb1.pair.com>, td01@csr.com says... > > (Relisted as no response from over Xmas period) > > > > Hi, > > > > I am having a real problem with error messages posted in the error.log file > > > > in the Apache directory. I have been doing lots of searches to find a > > > > solution and it seems obvious that many people are see this issue but I can > > > > find no resolution or explanation for the entries (see below). > > > > PHP Bug #25570 seemed to be a solution but the version of php I am using is > > > > 4.3.2 which is claimed to not exhibit the bug described in 25570. > > > > The system is running on a Win2K box, and we are using php, sql and Apache. > > > > > > Anyone out there have an idea of how to fix this issue? > > > > Thanks > > > > Trevor > > > > > > > > > > > > Some system info: > > > > System Windows NT UKRBCSR01 5.0 build 2195 > > > > Build Date May 28 2003 15:06:05 > > > > Server API Apache 2.0 Handler > > > > Apache/2.0.47 (Win32) PHP/4.3.2 > > > > This is the more worring of the issues: > > > > 21:18:49 2003 [notice] Parent: child process exited with status > > > > 4294967295 -- Restarting. > > > > > > > > But I am assuming that some or all of these are related. > > > > 21:19:44 2003 [warn] (OS 121)The semaphore timeout period has expired. : > > > > winnt_accept: Asynchronous AcceptEx failed. > > > > 00:50:58 2003 [warn] (OS 64)The specified network name is no longer > > > > available. : winnt_accept: Asynchronous AcceptEx failed. > > One or more of the results from > > http://www.google.com/search?q=Asynchronous+AcceptEx+failed > > may provide some insight into the problem? > > Cheers > -- > Quod subigo farinam > > A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. > Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? > A: Top-posting. > Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet?