Loading Store Locator Plus on either of my two VPSs results in total site crash

Home Forums Store Locator Plus Loading Store Locator Plus on either of my two VPSs results in total site crash

This topic contains 2 replies, has 2 voices, and was last updated by  Lance Cleveland 2 years, 6 months ago.

Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
  • Author
  • #27679



    I’ve got an interesting problem with SLP not functioning on either of my VPSs. One vps is centos 6.5, using nginx 1.7.9, php 5.6.5, and mariadb 5.5.41. The other VPS is just built uses Ubuntu 14.04, using nginx 1.7.10, HHVM 3.5.0, and mariadb 10.0.16.

    These are test sites only, so no caching or minify plugins or services are affecting SLP whatsoever.

    So the problem I’m having is that if I download and activate SLP from the wordpress plugin page on either VPS, trying to visit the domain results in a blank front page. I am still able to access the wordpress back end, and enabling debug in wp-config does nothing.

    Any ideas?

    • This topic was modified 2 years, 6 months ago by  peter.


    So immediately after typing this, I figured out at least what was causing it.

    My hhvm error logs show the following…

    \nNotice: Undefined index: google_maps in /var/www/testingwordpress.com/html/wp-content/plugins/query-monitor/output/html/assets.php on line 84

    \nCatchable fatal error: Argument 1 passed to QM_Output_Html_Assets::dependency_row() must be an instance of _WP_Dependency, null given in /var/www/testingwordpress.com/html/wp-content/plugins/query-monitor/output/html/assets.php on line 125

    turning off the query monitor plugin results in front page that works. So there’s something going on between SLP and query monitor, at least on both of my VPSs.


    Lance Cleveland

    Find out from Query Monitor what they are putting into that array.

    My guess is they are latching on to a WordPress function/method with a hook or filter.    Most likley they are picking up something from enqueue_script and are not handling the various iterations of that method.     Dependencies, optional parameters, queue level, or some other feature would be my first guess.

    Without having their code I can only guess what they are not checking or taking into account.

Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.