Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

assert failure nbytes == sizeof (command_t) on OS X #161

Closed
wttw opened this issue Feb 3, 2011 · 2 comments
Closed

assert failure nbytes == sizeof (command_t) on OS X #161

wttw opened this issue Feb 3, 2011 · 2 comments

Comments

@wttw
Copy link

wttw commented Feb 3, 2011

./configure && make && make check fails on OS X with an assertion failure "nbytes == sizeof (command_t)" at mailbox.cpp:193 during test_shutdown_stress

OS X intel, 10.6.6. Apple gcc 4.2.1. ZeroMQ 2.1.0 release and SHA: be6a8cc1c1ecfe9489fb51e4869af15a13fc2cd2

@sustrik
Copy link
Member

sustrik commented Feb 4, 2011

Yes. That's a known problem. It seems that OSX sets the sockepair buffer limit rather low and thus the sockepairs used for internal communication between threads inside 0MQ are not able to withstand the load. Moreover, it looks like there's a bug in OSX when resizing socketpair buffers (the size of the buffer reported by getsockopt is bogus). Anyway, I have no OSX box, so I cannot help much here. Feel free to have a look at the actual case of the problem yourself. The code you should look at is mailbox_t::send() function.

@rforte
Copy link

rforte commented Mar 31, 2011

I know this has been addressed before but just want to put the note in for others that if you modify /etc/sysctl.conf and add:
net.local.stream.sendspace=3000000
net.local.stream.recvspace=3000000
and also run: ulimit -n 1200
the test will begin passing.
P.S.
I noticed on a clean install of 10.6.6 the file /etc/sysctl.conf does not exist. So creating the file 'sudo vi /etc/sysctl.conf' does solve the issue.

benjdero pushed a commit to benjdero/libzmq that referenced this issue Feb 20, 2023
bluca pushed a commit that referenced this issue Oct 31, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants