-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Pid,
On 11/18/11 3:14 AM, Pid * wrote: > On 17 Nov 2011, at 20:39, Christopher Schultz > <ch...@christopherschultz.net> wrote: > > Pid, > > On 11/16/11 7:20 PM, Pid wrote: >>>> What I'm not clear on is whether the mod_jk worker >>>> connection_pool_size is 60 per Server child, or 60 * 10 >>>> Server children. >> >> mod_jk's connection_pool_size, when left to the default (which I >> think everyone should do) will auto-size for the situation. > > Auto-size or select-at-startup? I thought the latter, and that in > worker mpm it derived from ThreadsPerChild. I'm not sure I see the distinction. connection_pool_size defaults (or auto-sizes) to ThreadsPerChild which essentially means that for an httpd process, each thread has a connection waiting for it in the pool. > Right... but if MaxClients is 600 that's a lot of unused & open > connections, no? Well, it depends upon your expected load. You should see what kind of pool utilization you are getting (dunno if mod_jk can log that -- you can probably do some crude scanning of your access logs and see what kind of Tomcat access rate you are getting) and size your connection pool(s) accordingly. > I thought it defaults to 60 but becomes 600 in total because there > are 10 pools, one for each worker. I think it's ThreadsPerChild * Children * Workers. So that's 60 * 10 * 20 = 12000 total. > Correct, but if MaxClients is 600, what's the point of having more > connections open to the backend Tomcat(s)? Because you might need 600 connections to any one Tomcat backend at any time. And that backend choice isn't predictable. So you need 12000 so there's never any waiting. Certainly, you know more about your setup and expected traffic than mod_jk's defaults, so feel free to override the connection_pool_size - -- possibly even on a per-worker basis. >> So, what was the problem you were trying to solve in the first >> place? >> > I saw behaviour I didn't expect at a customer. Made more > complicated by other factors, so I wanted to clarify the expected > behaviour. Well, everything I've said here is what *I* would expect... not necessarily what will really happen :) I only play a mod_jk expert on TV. Do my expectations match what you are observing in this case? - -chris -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.17 (Darwin) Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk7Gc0oACgkQ9CaO5/Lv0PDOIQCgje+Rws2+aQ1kwYuWZYqfbD0C mO8AoLF50vTXhtvcs1OH5ReO/0BphHA6 =KkBC -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tomcat.apache.org
