On Thu, 2004-01-08 at 20:22, Simon Clewer wrote:
Huge memory usage ... each ithread uses about 10M of ram ( image of Apache, image of mod perl and image of our deep-link robot ), and as we use 5 ithreads plus the original thread that means that each Apache is using 60 M and because we trade on being the best and the fastest at what we do we need to keep plenty of Apaches ready and waiting ( about 20 ) - so we're using heaps of memory.
My question would be, why are you using Perl threads for this? The talk about the 5.8 threads sounds pretty bad, both for memory and performance. I can't imagine ithreads were a whole lot better on either front. I think you'd be better off forking.
Ah, sorry for chiming in again, it's true regarding the memory, but not that bad regarding performance. The only real performance overhead is to spawn a new perl interpreter (which is just terrible if you have many modules preloaded), which you can prespawn. Once it's spawned the run-time performance should be a bit worse than a normal perl, bad not as bad as you made it sound ;) On the other hand you get different benefits from using threads, and depending on your application your overall performance could be even better using threads. Of course if you are on windows, you have no choice but to use threads.
__________________________________________________________________ Stas Bekman JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com
-- Reporting bugs: http://perl.apache.org/bugs/ Mail list info: http://perl.apache.org/maillist/modperl.html
