2016-06-18 11:53 GMT+02:00 Luca Toscano <toscano.l...@gmail.com>: > Hi Apache devs! > > I have a question for you about the following users@ email thread: > > - > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/ba26440a53773426e29296569bec17692c77a4a3bd07e8b5331474c4@1464703063@%3Cusers.httpd.apache.org%3E > > This one is about Yann's fix for the MinSpareThreads lower bound > calculation for worker/event: > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1737447 > > I was able to explain how it works in case of bucket = 1, but I have > doubts when buckets > 1. I've read event/worker code and IIUC: > > 1) min_spare_threads = threads_per_child * (num_buckets - 1) + num_buckets > 2) max_spare_threads = min_spare_threads + threads_per_child * num_buckets > 3) idle_spawn_rate controls the amount of new children created in > each perform_idle_server_maintenance run. > 4) perform_idle_server_maintenance is called per bucket and calculates > max|min_spare_threads accordingly. > > Rick's question in the email thread is about what happens when, with two > buckets and two processes for example, httpd reaches 50% of idle threads. I > made some calculations and an extra process should be indeed created, but > then killed because of the max_spare_threads limit. Is it going to keep > creating/destroying child processes or does idle_spawn_rate prevents it? > > Final goal would be to add notes in (Min|Max)SpareThreads documentation to > warn users about the (good) side effects of setting ListenCoresBucketRatio > (there is a reference in the trunk doc but very generic, it would be great > to have more details IMHO). > > Anyone? :)
Thanks! Luca
