Re: WOWorkerThreadCountMax

2016-09-14 Thread Chuck Hill 
I barely remember the name FastCGI.  That said, not much has changed in this 
area in a long, long time.

From: Michael Kondratov <mich...@aspireauctions.com>
Date: Wednesday, September 14, 2016 at 1:41 PM
To: Chuck Hill <ch...@gevityinc.com>
Cc: WebObjects-Dev Mailing List List <webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com>
Subject: Re: WOWorkerThreadCountMax

Chuck,
Thank you! I will look through the presentation. I’ve turned of connection 
pooling and the system is far more stable. Appears WO Apache Adaptor should 
have it disabled. At one presentation you’ve mentioned FastCGI adaptor. Is it 
still an option?

Michael Kondratov
Aspire Auctions, Inc.
216-231-5515

On Sep 14, 2016, at 1:55 PM, Chuck Hill 
<ch...@gevityinc.com<mailto:ch...@gevityinc.com>> wrote:

The apps use a worker thread to respond to wotaskd, so if there are no threads 
there is no response.   Bad Things ™ ensue.

My wotask Internals presentation from WOWODC 2014 might have some points of 
interest.  I barely recall what is in it.

Chuck


From: Michael Kondratov 
<mich...@aspireauctions.com<mailto:mich...@aspireauctions.com>>
Date: Wednesday, September 14, 2016 at 10:27 AM
To: Chuck Hill <ch...@gevityinc.com<mailto:ch...@gevityinc.com>>
Cc: WebObjects-Dev Mailing List List 
<webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com<mailto:webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com>>
Subject: Re: WOWorkerThreadCountMax

All kind of strange things start to happen once we hit 100-200 requests per 
second loads. If an instance gets overloaded, WOTaskD becomes unresponsive and 
Apache stalls after as well. Quickly killing the stalled instance brings WOTask 
and Apache back to live. Maybe setting Apache Adaptor to poll wotask at 10 
minute and not 10 second interval could fix that?


Michael Kondratov
Aspire Auctions, Inc.
216-231-5515

On Sep 14, 2016, at 1:20 PM, Chuck Hill 
<ch...@gevityinc.com<mailto:ch...@gevityinc.com>> wrote:

I am not sure how connection pooling, which happens in the Apace process, and 
Keep-Alive interact.  I thought the former was for the ServerSocket, but I 
could be very wrong.  I don’t know why you are seeing what you are seeing below.

Chuck

From: Michael Kondratov 
<mich...@aspireauctions.com<mailto:mich...@aspireauctions.com>>
Date: Wednesday, September 14, 2016 at 6:08 AM
To: Chuck Hill <ch...@gevityinc.com<mailto:ch...@gevityinc.com>>
Cc: WebObjects-Dev Mailing List List 
<webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com<mailto:webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com>>
Subject: Re: WOWorkerThreadCountMax

I have noticed that the number of worker threads immediately goes us when we 
set connection pool to 1. If it is set to zero, worker threads stop at about 
70, but we see 50% system time CPU utilization. Once pooling is enables, CPU 
utilization drops, but workers grow to the max setting.

Michael

Sent from my iPad

On Sep 13, 2016, at 6:44 PM, Michael Kondratov 
<mich...@aspireauctions.com<mailto:mich...@aspireauctions.com>> wrote:
Chuck,
We are handling around 100 requests per second spread over 5-10 application 
instances. We do have KeepAlive enabled in Apache. How would I manage that in 
WO? If the application thread count grows to 300 threads or so, does it mean 
that at one time we had a back log of ~250 requests or so?

Michael Kondratov
Aspire Auctions, Inc.
216-231-5515

On Sep 13, 2016, at 6:40 PM, Chuck Hill 
<ch...@gevityinc.com<mailto:ch...@gevityinc.com>> wrote:

There is no easy answer.

Ignoring Keep-Alive, you need to manage this setting, the Listen Queue Size, 
and number of instances to ensure that your app instances don’t build up a 
backlog of requests that will take longer to process than your users are 
willing to wait.  Otherwise, your instances are going to be calculating 
responses that are just going to encounter a broken pipe when attempting to 
respond to the client.  That is useless processing.  256 is way, way too high 
unless you are processing a lot of very short, quick responses.  Relating this 
to the number of Apache processes is pretty meaningless.  Apache is not doing 
much relative to your app.

Request with Keep-Alive complicate this significantly as they tie up a worker 
thread until the connection is closed.


Chuck

From: 
<webobjects-dev-bounces+chill=gevityinc@lists.apple.com<mailto:webobjects-dev-bounces+chill=gevityinc@lists.apple.com>>
 on behalf of Michael Kondratov 
<mich...@aspireauctions.com<mailto:mich...@aspireauctions.com>>
Date: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 at 3:33 PM
To: WebObjects-Dev Mailing List List 
<webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com<mailto:webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com>>
Subject: WOWorkerThreadCountMax

Hello,
 Does it make sense to set the value equal to or greater than the number of 
active apache processes? Our server is receiving more traffic than usual and 
each application is hitting the default limit of 256. I assume it is due to

Re: WOWorkerThreadCountMax

2016-09-14 Thread Michael Kondratov 
Chuck,
Thank you! I will look through the presentation. I’ve turned of 
connection pooling and the system is far more stable. Appears WO Apache Adaptor 
should have it disabled. At one presentation you’ve mentioned FastCGI adaptor. 
Is it still an option?

Michael Kondratov
Aspire Auctions, Inc.
216-231-5515

> On Sep 14, 2016, at 1:55 PM, Chuck Hill <ch...@gevityinc.com> wrote:
> 
> The apps use a worker thread to respond to wotaskd, so if there are no 
> threads there is no response.   Bad Things ™ ensue.
>  
> My wotask Internals presentation from WOWODC 2014 might have some points of 
> interest.  I barely recall what is in it.
>  
> Chuck
>  
>  
> From: Michael Kondratov <mich...@aspireauctions.com>
> Date: Wednesday, September 14, 2016 at 10:27 AM
> To: Chuck Hill <ch...@gevityinc.com>
> Cc: WebObjects-Dev Mailing List List <webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com>
> Subject: Re: WOWorkerThreadCountMax
>  
> All kind of strange things start to happen once we hit 100-200 requests per 
> second loads. If an instance gets overloaded, WOTaskD becomes unresponsive 
> and Apache stalls after as well. Quickly killing the stalled instance brings 
> WOTask and Apache back to live. Maybe setting Apache Adaptor to poll wotask 
> at 10 minute and not 10 second interval could fix that?
>  
>  
> Michael Kondratov
> Aspire Auctions, Inc.
> 216-231-5515
>  
> On Sep 14, 2016, at 1:20 PM, Chuck Hill <ch...@gevityinc.com 
> <mailto:ch...@gevityinc.com>> wrote:
>  
> I am not sure how connection pooling, which happens in the Apace process, and 
> Keep-Alive interact.  I thought the former was for the ServerSocket, but I 
> could be very wrong.  I don’t know why you are seeing what you are seeing 
> below.
>  
> Chuck
>  
> From: Michael Kondratov <mich...@aspireauctions.com 
> <mailto:mich...@aspireauctions.com>>
> Date: Wednesday, September 14, 2016 at 6:08 AM
> To: Chuck Hill <ch...@gevityinc.com <mailto:ch...@gevityinc.com>>
> Cc: WebObjects-Dev Mailing List List <webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com 
> <mailto:webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com>>
> Subject: Re: WOWorkerThreadCountMax
>  
> I have noticed that the number of worker threads immediately goes us when we 
> set connection pool to 1. If it is set to zero, worker threads stop at about 
> 70, but we see 50% system time CPU utilization. Once pooling is enables, CPU 
> utilization drops, but workers grow to the max setting.
>  
> Michael
> 
> Sent from my iPad
> 
> On Sep 13, 2016, at 6:44 PM, Michael Kondratov <mich...@aspireauctions.com 
> <mailto:mich...@aspireauctions.com>> wrote:
> 
> Chuck, 
> We are handling around 100 requests per second spread over 5-10 application 
> instances. We do have KeepAlive enabled in Apache. How would I manage that in 
> WO? If the application thread count grows to 300 threads or so, does it mean 
> that at one time we had a back log of ~250 requests or so?
>  
> Michael Kondratov
> Aspire Auctions, Inc.
> 216-231-5515
>  
> On Sep 13, 2016, at 6:40 PM, Chuck Hill <ch...@gevityinc.com 
> <mailto:ch...@gevityinc.com>> wrote:
>  
> There is no easy answer. 
>  
> Ignoring Keep-Alive, you need to manage this setting, the Listen Queue Size, 
> and number of instances to ensure that your app instances don’t build up a 
> backlog of requests that will take longer to process than your users are 
> willing to wait.  Otherwise, your instances are going to be calculating 
> responses that are just going to encounter a broken pipe when attempting to 
> respond to the client.  That is useless processing.  256 is way, way too high 
> unless you are processing a lot of very short, quick responses.  Relating 
> this to the number of Apache processes is pretty meaningless.  Apache is not 
> doing much relative to your app.
>  
> Request with Keep-Alive complicate this significantly as they tie up a worker 
> thread until the connection is closed.
>  
>  
> Chuck
>  
> From: <webobjects-dev-bounces+chill=gevityinc@lists.apple.com 
> <mailto:webobjects-dev-bounces+chill=gevityinc@lists.apple.com>> on 
> behalf of Michael Kondratov <mich...@aspireauctions.com 
> <mailto:mich...@aspireauctions.com>>
> Date: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 at 3:33 PM
> To: WebObjects-Dev Mailing List List <webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com 
> <mailto:webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com>>
> Subject: WOWorkerThreadCountMax
>  
> Hello,
>  Does it make sense to set the value equal to or greater than the number 
> of active apache processes? Our server is receiving more traffic than usual 
> and each application is hitting the default lim

Re: WOWorkerThreadCountMax

2016-09-14 Thread Chuck Hill 
The apps use a worker thread to respond to wotaskd, so if there are no threads 
there is no response.   Bad Things ™ ensue.

My wotask Internals presentation from WOWODC 2014 might have some points of 
interest.  I barely recall what is in it.

Chuck


From: Michael Kondratov <mich...@aspireauctions.com>
Date: Wednesday, September 14, 2016 at 10:27 AM
To: Chuck Hill <ch...@gevityinc.com>
Cc: WebObjects-Dev Mailing List List <webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com>
Subject: Re: WOWorkerThreadCountMax

All kind of strange things start to happen once we hit 100-200 requests per 
second loads. If an instance gets overloaded, WOTaskD becomes unresponsive and 
Apache stalls after as well. Quickly killing the stalled instance brings WOTask 
and Apache back to live. Maybe setting Apache Adaptor to poll wotask at 10 
minute and not 10 second interval could fix that?


Michael Kondratov
Aspire Auctions, Inc.
216-231-5515

On Sep 14, 2016, at 1:20 PM, Chuck Hill 
<ch...@gevityinc.com<mailto:ch...@gevityinc.com>> wrote:

I am not sure how connection pooling, which happens in the Apace process, and 
Keep-Alive interact.  I thought the former was for the ServerSocket, but I 
could be very wrong.  I don’t know why you are seeing what you are seeing below.

Chuck

From: Michael Kondratov 
<mich...@aspireauctions.com<mailto:mich...@aspireauctions.com>>
Date: Wednesday, September 14, 2016 at 6:08 AM
To: Chuck Hill <ch...@gevityinc.com<mailto:ch...@gevityinc.com>>
Cc: WebObjects-Dev Mailing List List 
<webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com<mailto:webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com>>
Subject: Re: WOWorkerThreadCountMax

I have noticed that the number of worker threads immediately goes us when we 
set connection pool to 1. If it is set to zero, worker threads stop at about 
70, but we see 50% system time CPU utilization. Once pooling is enables, CPU 
utilization drops, but workers grow to the max setting.

Michael

Sent from my iPad

On Sep 13, 2016, at 6:44 PM, Michael Kondratov 
<mich...@aspireauctions.com<mailto:mich...@aspireauctions.com>> wrote:
Chuck,
We are handling around 100 requests per second spread over 5-10 application 
instances. We do have KeepAlive enabled in Apache. How would I manage that in 
WO? If the application thread count grows to 300 threads or so, does it mean 
that at one time we had a back log of ~250 requests or so?

Michael Kondratov
Aspire Auctions, Inc.
216-231-5515

On Sep 13, 2016, at 6:40 PM, Chuck Hill 
<ch...@gevityinc.com<mailto:ch...@gevityinc.com>> wrote:

There is no easy answer.

Ignoring Keep-Alive, you need to manage this setting, the Listen Queue Size, 
and number of instances to ensure that your app instances don’t build up a 
backlog of requests that will take longer to process than your users are 
willing to wait.  Otherwise, your instances are going to be calculating 
responses that are just going to encounter a broken pipe when attempting to 
respond to the client.  That is useless processing.  256 is way, way too high 
unless you are processing a lot of very short, quick responses.  Relating this 
to the number of Apache processes is pretty meaningless.  Apache is not doing 
much relative to your app.

Request with Keep-Alive complicate this significantly as they tie up a worker 
thread until the connection is closed.


Chuck

From: 
<webobjects-dev-bounces+chill=gevityinc@lists.apple.com<mailto:webobjects-dev-bounces+chill=gevityinc@lists.apple.com>>
 on behalf of Michael Kondratov 
<mich...@aspireauctions.com<mailto:mich...@aspireauctions.com>>
Date: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 at 3:33 PM
To: WebObjects-Dev Mailing List List 
<webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com<mailto:webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com>>
Subject: WOWorkerThreadCountMax

Hello,
 Does it make sense to set the value equal to or greater than the number of 
active apache processes? Our server is receiving more traffic than usual and 
each application is hitting the default limit of 256. I assume it is due to 
each apache process trying to maintain a connection to each instance. We 
typically see apache grow to 1000 processes.


Michael Kondratov
Aspire Auctions, Inc.
216-231-5515


___
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list  
(Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com<mailto:Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com>)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/chill%40gevityinc.com

This email sent to ch...@gevityinc.com<mailto:ch...@gevityinc.com>

___
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list  
(Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com<mailto:Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com>)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
https://lists.apple.

Re: WOWorkerThreadCountMax

2016-09-14 Thread Michael Kondratov 
All kind of strange things start to happen once we hit 100-200 requests per 
second loads. If an instance gets overloaded, WOTaskD becomes unresponsive and 
Apache stalls after as well. Quickly killing the stalled instance brings WOTask 
and Apache back to live. Maybe setting Apache Adaptor to poll wotask at 10 
minute and not 10 second interval could fix that?


Michael Kondratov
Aspire Auctions, Inc.
216-231-5515

> On Sep 14, 2016, at 1:20 PM, Chuck Hill <ch...@gevityinc.com> wrote:
> 
> I am not sure how connection pooling, which happens in the Apace process, and 
> Keep-Alive interact.  I thought the former was for the ServerSocket, but I 
> could be very wrong.  I don’t know why you are seeing what you are seeing 
> below.
>  
> Chuck
>  
> From: Michael Kondratov <mich...@aspireauctions.com 
> <mailto:mich...@aspireauctions.com>>
> Date: Wednesday, September 14, 2016 at 6:08 AM
> To: Chuck Hill <ch...@gevityinc.com <mailto:ch...@gevityinc.com>>
> Cc: WebObjects-Dev Mailing List List <webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com 
> <mailto:webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com>>
> Subject: Re: WOWorkerThreadCountMax
>  
> I have noticed that the number of worker threads immediately goes us when we 
> set connection pool to 1. If it is set to zero, worker threads stop at about 
> 70, but we see 50% system time CPU utilization. Once pooling is enables, CPU 
> utilization drops, but workers grow to the max setting.
>  
> Michael
> 
> Sent from my iPad
> 
> On Sep 13, 2016, at 6:44 PM, Michael Kondratov <mich...@aspireauctions.com 
> <mailto:mich...@aspireauctions.com>> wrote:
> 
> Chuck, 
> We are handling around 100 requests per second spread over 5-10 application 
> instances. We do have KeepAlive enabled in Apache. How would I manage that in 
> WO? If the application thread count grows to 300 threads or so, does it mean 
> that at one time we had a back log of ~250 requests or so?
>  
> Michael Kondratov
> Aspire Auctions, Inc.
> 216-231-5515
>  
> On Sep 13, 2016, at 6:40 PM, Chuck Hill <ch...@gevityinc.com 
> <mailto:ch...@gevityinc.com>> wrote:
>  
> There is no easy answer. 
>  
> Ignoring Keep-Alive, you need to manage this setting, the Listen Queue Size, 
> and number of instances to ensure that your app instances don’t build up a 
> backlog of requests that will take longer to process than your users are 
> willing to wait.  Otherwise, your instances are going to be calculating 
> responses that are just going to encounter a broken pipe when attempting to 
> respond to the client.  That is useless processing.  256 is way, way too high 
> unless you are processing a lot of very short, quick responses.  Relating 
> this to the number of Apache processes is pretty meaningless.  Apache is not 
> doing much relative to your app.
>  
> Request with Keep-Alive complicate this significantly as they tie up a worker 
> thread until the connection is closed.
>  
>  
> Chuck
>  
> From: <webobjects-dev-bounces+chill=gevityinc@lists.apple.com 
> <mailto:webobjects-dev-bounces+chill=gevityinc@lists.apple.com>> on 
> behalf of Michael Kondratov <mich...@aspireauctions.com 
> <mailto:mich...@aspireauctions.com>>
> Date: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 at 3:33 PM
> To: WebObjects-Dev Mailing List List <webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com 
> <mailto:webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com>>
> Subject: WOWorkerThreadCountMax
>  
> Hello,
>  Does it make sense to set the value equal to or greater than the number 
> of active apache processes? Our server is receiving more traffic than usual 
> and each application is hitting the default limit of 256. I assume it is due 
> to each apache process trying to maintain a connection to each instance. We 
> typically see apache grow to 1000 processes.
>  
>  
> Michael Kondratov
> Aspire Auctions, Inc.
> 216-231-5515
>  
>  
> ___
> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
> Webobjects-dev mailing list  (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com 
> <mailto:Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com>)
> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
> https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/chill%40gevityinc.com 
> <https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/chill%40gevityinc.com>
>  
> This email sent to ch...@gevityinc.com <mailto:ch...@gevityinc.com>
>  
> ___
> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
> Webobjects-dev mailing list  (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com 
> <mailto:Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com>)
> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Sub

Re: WOWorkerThreadCountMax

2016-09-14 Thread Chuck Hill 
I am not sure how connection pooling, which happens in the Apace process, and 
Keep-Alive interact.  I thought the former was for the ServerSocket, but I 
could be very wrong.  I don’t know why you are seeing what you are seeing below.

Chuck

From: Michael Kondratov <mich...@aspireauctions.com>
Date: Wednesday, September 14, 2016 at 6:08 AM
To: Chuck Hill <ch...@gevityinc.com>
Cc: WebObjects-Dev Mailing List List <webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com>
Subject: Re: WOWorkerThreadCountMax

I have noticed that the number of worker threads immediately goes us when we 
set connection pool to 1. If it is set to zero, worker threads stop at about 
70, but we see 50% system time CPU utilization. Once pooling is enables, CPU 
utilization drops, but workers grow to the max setting.

Michael

Sent from my iPad

On Sep 13, 2016, at 6:44 PM, Michael Kondratov 
<mich...@aspireauctions.com<mailto:mich...@aspireauctions.com>> wrote:
Chuck,
We are handling around 100 requests per second spread over 5-10 application 
instances. We do have KeepAlive enabled in Apache. How would I manage that in 
WO? If the application thread count grows to 300 threads or so, does it mean 
that at one time we had a back log of ~250 requests or so?

Michael Kondratov
Aspire Auctions, Inc.
216-231-5515

On Sep 13, 2016, at 6:40 PM, Chuck Hill 
<ch...@gevityinc.com<mailto:ch...@gevityinc.com>> wrote:

There is no easy answer.

Ignoring Keep-Alive, you need to manage this setting, the Listen Queue Size, 
and number of instances to ensure that your app instances don’t build up a 
backlog of requests that will take longer to process than your users are 
willing to wait.  Otherwise, your instances are going to be calculating 
responses that are just going to encounter a broken pipe when attempting to 
respond to the client.  That is useless processing.  256 is way, way too high 
unless you are processing a lot of very short, quick responses.  Relating this 
to the number of Apache processes is pretty meaningless.  Apache is not doing 
much relative to your app.

Request with Keep-Alive complicate this significantly as they tie up a worker 
thread until the connection is closed.


Chuck

From: 
<webobjects-dev-bounces+chill=gevityinc@lists.apple.com<mailto:webobjects-dev-bounces+chill=gevityinc@lists.apple.com>>
 on behalf of Michael Kondratov 
<mich...@aspireauctions.com<mailto:mich...@aspireauctions.com>>
Date: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 at 3:33 PM
To: WebObjects-Dev Mailing List List 
<webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com<mailto:webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com>>
Subject: WOWorkerThreadCountMax

Hello,
 Does it make sense to set the value equal to or greater than the number of 
active apache processes? Our server is receiving more traffic than usual and 
each application is hitting the default limit of 256. I assume it is due to 
each apache process trying to maintain a connection to each instance. We 
typically see apache grow to 1000 processes.


Michael Kondratov
Aspire Auctions, Inc.
216-231-5515


___
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list  
(Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com<mailto:Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com>)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/chill%40gevityinc.com

This email sent to ch...@gevityinc.com<mailto:ch...@gevityinc.com>

___
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list  
(Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com<mailto:Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com>)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/michael%40aspireauctions.com

This email sent to mich...@aspireauctions.com<mailto:mich...@aspireauctions.com>
 ___
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list  (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com

Re: WOWorkerThreadCountMax

2016-09-14 Thread Michael Kondratov 
I have noticed that the number of worker threads immediately goes us when we 
set connection pool to 1. If it is set to zero, worker threads stop at about 
70, but we see 50% system time CPU utilization. Once pooling is enables, CPU 
utilization drops, but workers grow to the max setting.

Michael

Sent from my iPad

> On Sep 13, 2016, at 6:44 PM, Michael Kondratov  
> wrote:
> 
> Chuck,
>   We are handling around 100 requests per second spread over 5-10 
> application instances. We do have KeepAlive enabled in Apache. How would I 
> manage that in WO? If the application thread count grows to 300 threads or 
> so, does it mean that at one time we had a back log of ~250 requests or so?
> 
> Michael Kondratov
> Aspire Auctions, Inc.
> 216-231-5515
> 
>> On Sep 13, 2016, at 6:40 PM, Chuck Hill  wrote:
>> 
>> There is no easy answer. 
>>  
>> Ignoring Keep-Alive, you need to manage this setting, the Listen Queue Size, 
>> and number of instances to ensure that your app instances don’t build up a 
>> backlog of requests that will take longer to process than your users are 
>> willing to wait.  Otherwise, your instances are going to be calculating 
>> responses that are just going to encounter a broken pipe when attempting to 
>> respond to the client.  That is useless processing.  256 is way, way too 
>> high unless you are processing a lot of very short, quick responses.  
>> Relating this to the number of Apache processes is pretty meaningless.  
>> Apache is not doing much relative to your app.
>>  
>> Request with Keep-Alive complicate this significantly as they tie up a 
>> worker thread until the connection is closed.
>>  
>>  
>> Chuck
>>  
>> From:  on behalf 
>> of Michael Kondratov 
>> Date: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 at 3:33 PM
>> To: WebObjects-Dev Mailing List List 
>> Subject: WOWorkerThreadCountMax
>>  
>> Hello,
>>  Does it make sense to set the value equal to or greater than the number 
>> of active apache processes? Our server is receiving more traffic than usual 
>> and each application is hitting the default limit of 256. I assume it is due 
>> to each apache process trying to maintain a connection to each instance. We 
>> typically see apache grow to 1000 processes.
>>  
>>  
>> Michael Kondratov
>> Aspire Auctions, Inc.
>> 216-231-5515
>>  
>>  
>> ___
>> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
>> Webobjects-dev mailing list  (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com)
>> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
>> https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/chill%40gevityinc.com
>>  
>> This email sent to ch...@gevityinc.com
> 
> ___
> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
> Webobjects-dev mailing list  (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com)
> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
> https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/michael%40aspireauctions.com
> 
> This email sent to mich...@aspireauctions.com
 ___
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list  (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com

Re: WOWorkerThreadCountMax

2016-09-13 Thread Michael Kondratov 
Chuck,
We are handling around 100 requests per second spread over 5-10 
application instances. We do have KeepAlive enabled in Apache. How would I 
manage that in WO? If the application thread count grows to 300 threads or so, 
does it mean that at one time we had a back log of ~250 requests or so?

Michael Kondratov
Aspire Auctions, Inc.
216-231-5515

> On Sep 13, 2016, at 6:40 PM, Chuck Hill  wrote:
> 
> There is no easy answer. 
>  
> Ignoring Keep-Alive, you need to manage this setting, the Listen Queue Size, 
> and number of instances to ensure that your app instances don’t build up a 
> backlog of requests that will take longer to process than your users are 
> willing to wait.  Otherwise, your instances are going to be calculating 
> responses that are just going to encounter a broken pipe when attempting to 
> respond to the client.  That is useless processing.  256 is way, way too high 
> unless you are processing a lot of very short, quick responses.  Relating 
> this to the number of Apache processes is pretty meaningless.  Apache is not 
> doing much relative to your app.
>  
> Request with Keep-Alive complicate this significantly as they tie up a worker 
> thread until the connection is closed.
>  
>  
> Chuck
>  
> From:  on behalf 
> of Michael Kondratov 
> Date: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 at 3:33 PM
> To: WebObjects-Dev Mailing List List 
> Subject: WOWorkerThreadCountMax
>  
> Hello,
>  Does it make sense to set the value equal to or greater than the number 
> of active apache processes? Our server is receiving more traffic than usual 
> and each application is hitting the default limit of 256. I assume it is due 
> to each apache process trying to maintain a connection to each instance. We 
> typically see apache grow to 1000 processes.
>  
>  
> Michael Kondratov
> Aspire Auctions, Inc.
> 216-231-5515
>  
>  
> ___
> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
> Webobjects-dev mailing list  (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com 
> )
> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
> https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/chill%40gevityinc.com 
> 
>  
> This email sent to ch...@gevityinc.com 
 ___
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list  (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com

Re: WOWorkerThreadCountMax

2016-09-13 Thread Chuck Hill 
There is no easy answer.

Ignoring Keep-Alive, you need to manage this setting, the Listen Queue Size, 
and number of instances to ensure that your app instances don’t build up a 
backlog of requests that will take longer to process than your users are 
willing to wait.  Otherwise, your instances are going to be calculating 
responses that are just going to encounter a broken pipe when attempting to 
respond to the client.  That is useless processing.  256 is way, way too high 
unless you are processing a lot of very short, quick responses.  Relating this 
to the number of Apache processes is pretty meaningless.  Apache is not doing 
much relative to your app.

Request with Keep-Alive complicate this significantly as they tie up a worker 
thread until the connection is closed.


Chuck

From:  on behalf of 
Michael Kondratov 
Date: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 at 3:33 PM
To: WebObjects-Dev Mailing List List 
Subject: WOWorkerThreadCountMax

Hello,
 Does it make sense to set the value equal to or greater than the number of 
active apache processes? Our server is receiving more traffic than usual and 
each application is hitting the default limit of 256. I assume it is due to 
each apache process trying to maintain a connection to each instance. We 
typically see apache grow to 1000 processes.


Michael Kondratov
Aspire Auctions, Inc.
216-231-5515


___
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list  
(Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/chill%40gevityinc.com

This email sent to ch...@gevityinc.com
 ___
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list  (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com