On Mon, 2004-02-23 at 18:01, Perrin Harkins wrote: > On Mon, 2004-02-23 at 17:16, Richard F. Rebel wrote: > > Interesting. I just noticed documentation on the web site about these > > directives. Were these docs here about 1 year ago (when I wrote this > > app???). > > Those have been there for years. I remember that stuff being in Doug's > slides before the first alpha release of mp2.
I feel like king dork. Eh well, do I get points for making a prod system run with mp2 and mpm-worker? > > I have *no* perlInterp* configuration directives. > > Judging by the defaults, it sounds like you have a total of 50 perl > interpreters then, and all other threads are either serving static files > or queuing in line for use of an interpreter. This explains some of the sporadic slow results I get on occasion that don't seem to be related to anything external. Apache was having to on occasion start new interpreter threads. > You would get basically the same effect by running prefork with > MaxClients set to 50, and a reverse proxy in front. Actually, you could > probably run a lot more interpreters with prefork, because it is > currently MORE memory efficient than threads. I guess you gain a bit of > performance by not going through the proxy, but lose some scalability by > not having the proxy buffer your output to slow clients. Most of our clients are *slow*, so perhaps this is why things seem to work so well. I have increased the number of interpreters and have noticed a decrease in cpu usage and an improvement in performance in general. Thanks. Now, does this sort of explain why I was seeing more memory usage with prefork, slow clients? When exactly is the perl interpreter put back into the 'free' list? Does apache spoon feed the slow clients freeing up the interpreter for other requests after you return from your handler? > - Perrin -- Richard F. Rebel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> WhenU.com
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
