Perrin Harkins wrote:
On 6/15/07, Cyril SCETBON <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Is there any difference in using each syntax to signal a warning in the
error log of Apache ? Performance impact ?
Theoretically, the longer version is probably faster, but I doubt
you'll ever be able to measure a sig
On Jun 16, 2007, at 11:13 AM, Perrin Harkins wrote:
300 is nothing for MySQL. You should be able to handle a few thousand
on a machine with enough RAM.
agreed. MySQL connections are cheap. Postgres ones consume RAM and
kernel resources, and more than 50 sucks on a box.
If you already
On 6/16/07, Thomas den Braber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have 300 connections open ( maximum but it can happen ).
300 is nothing for MySQL. You should be able to handle a few thousand
on a machine with enough RAM.
If you run many sites not all sites use their db connection, only the
ones w
On 6/15/07, Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Would it make any sense to write a DBD module that uses apr_dbd as a backend?
Better performance and less memory maybe ?
Well, from what I'm reading, it only helps when you run a threaded
MPM. I don't plan to do that because of the memory problems
Hi,
I once thought about this and for e.g. MySQL this is a piece of cake in
theory because the only thing you need to do is
hack a few line of the DBD::mysql-code to get the connection pointer
from apr_dbd and not create one from scratch.
Tom
Thomas schrieb:
It wasn't intended to be. It wa
>
> how about some case-specific information about your request:
The reason why I was thinking about a bd pool was because my application,
a CMS system, runs in prefork on Linux qw(mp2 apache2.2). If I allow a
maximum of 30 forks and I host 10 sites which all have their own database
I have 30
