Message info From:Justin Dorfman Subject:Re: could not build the referers_hash Date:Fri, 30 Mar 2012 09:08:54 -0700

Hey Cliff,

Here are the current values:

server_names_hash_max_size 65536;
server_names_hash_bucket_size 256;

The number of vhosts we have on that cluster is23,252 (not all active, need to clean that up.)

Are those valuessufficientfor the amount of vhosts?

FYI We have 32gb of ram if that makes any difference.


Justin Dorfman

On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 8:17 AM, Cliff Wells <> wrote:
On Thu, 2012-03-29 at 19:04 -0700, Justin Dorfman wrote:
> Hey Cliff,
> I did, same issue. The way we ended up "fixing" it was deleting all
> of the vhosts and syncing them from another PoP.

How large did you make the value? With a large number of vhosts the
value might need to be significantly higher. Also, I'm not sure of the
context for this value, it might need to be at the http level.

There's also a related value, referers_hash_bucket_size that might need
to be increased.

The only information I found was from this thread (translated from
Russian via google):

2011/7/19 Igor Sysoev <igor@xxxxxxxxx>:
> Changes in nginx 1.0.5 19.07.2011
> *) Feature: the referer_hash_max_size and
> Referer_hash_bucket_size.
> Thank you Witold Filipczyk.

With these guidelines, there are some problems:
- In the error messages as they are called, and referers_hash_max_size
- The default value for referer_hash_max_size in the error message
described as a 128 (actually - 2048)
- It is not clear how to find exactly where the problem
that is, such as the diagnosis is
nginx: [emerg] could not build the referers_hash, you should increase
referers_hash_bucket_size: 64
But that's not enough, as the context for referer_hash_max_size server
and location


nginx mailing list