On 8/13/06, Qingshan Xie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
--- Joshua Slive <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
..
> Having a portion of children hanging out in
keepalive
> could hurt even if there are children free, because
> it could cause more context switches/memory cache
> misses when switching requests
--- Joshua Slive <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
..
> Having a portion of children hanging out in
keepalive
> could hurt even if there are children free, because
> it could cause more context switches/memory cache
> misses when switching requests between children.
I don't fully understand what
On 8/12/06, Qingshan Xie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Joshua, I re-read your comment, have couple questions
inserted below. Could you please help me again?
Thx, Q.Xie
--- Joshua Slive <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
..
> If the load-testing clients are not using
> keep-alives, the server will
>
Joshua, I re-read your comment, have couple questions
inserted below. Could you please help me again?
Thx, Q.Xie
--- Joshua Slive <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
..
> If the load-testing clients are not using
> keep-alives, the server will
> almost certainly be slower with keep-alives turned
>
Joshua, Thanks a lot for you reply.
I also think about the possible explanation.
Theoretically, Without "KeepAlive On", Apache parent
will pick whatever needed number of multiple children
to handle multiple requests in parallel. However, in
the condition of "KeepAlive On", a specific child,
whic
On 8/10/06, Qingshan Xie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,All,
We have apache-2.0.54 installed on Solaris and
Linux boxes. We did a bounch of Load-Test with
KeepAlive On or Off on multiple jpg, gif, text files.
The test results are discourage. The webServer has
slower response time when KeepAl
Hi,All,
We have apache-2.0.54 installed on Solaris and
Linux boxes. We did a bounch of Load-Test with
KeepAlive On or Off on multiple jpg, gif, text files.
The test results are discourage. The webServer has
slower response time when KeepAlive is On compared to
the condition when KeepAlive i
