[fossil-users] Fossil server load control

2014-03-12 Thread Richard Hipp
A new feature was recently added to Fossil that allows it to deny expensive requests (such as blame or tarball on a large repository) if the server load average is too high. See http://www.fossil-scm.org/fossil/doc/tip/www/server.wiki#loadmgmt for further information. This new feature was

Re: [fossil-users] Fossil server load control

2014-03-12 Thread Andreas Kupries
On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 6:40 AM, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote: A new feature was recently added to Fossil that allows it to deny expensive requests (such as blame or tarball on a large repository) if the server load average is too high. See

Re: [fossil-users] Fossil server load control

2014-03-12 Thread Richard Hipp
On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 1:13 PM, Andreas Kupries andre...@activestate.comwrote: On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 6:40 AM, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote: And if you have alternative suggestions about how to keep a light-weight host running smoothly under a massive Fossil request load, please

Re: [fossil-users] Fossil server load control

2014-03-12 Thread Stephan Beal
On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 6:13 PM, Andreas Kupries andre...@activestate.comwrote: How sensible do you think would it be to have a (limited-size) (in-memory|disk) cache to hold the most recently requested tarballs ? That way a high-demand tarball, etc. would be computed only once and then served

Re: [fossil-users] Fossil server load control

2014-03-12 Thread Ramon Ribó
​ The current Fossil implementation runs a separate process for each HTTP request. So an in-memory cache wouldn't be helpful. It has to be disk- based. ​Does not FastCGI do exactly the opposite?​ ​RR​ 2014-03-12 18:25 GMT+01:00 Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org: On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at

Re: [fossil-users] Fossil server load control

2014-03-12 Thread Richard Hipp
On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Stephan Beal sgb...@googlemail.com wrote: In my experience, most proxies won't cache for requests which have URL parameters. Whether or not that's generally true, i can't say. For static content (lots of what fossil serves is static), the URLs can/should be

Re: [fossil-users] Fossil server load control

2014-03-12 Thread Stephan Beal
On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 6:31 PM, Ramon Ribó ram...@compassis.com wrote: The current Fossil implementation runs a separate process for each HTTP request. So an in-memory cache wouldn't be helpful. It has to be disk- based. Does not FastCGI do exactly the opposite? FastCGI requires