Hey Sean,

2009/4/12 DeNigris Sean <[email protected]>:
> My server has almost 20 different options for FastCGI apps.  What
> would be the best settings for Wt?  Are there any settings that are
> always (or almost always) best/incompatible?

Unfortunately, much will depend on the server software you use, and
documentation is quite sparse about many of these options. A google
learned me that you are using LiteSpeed, right ? As we have no
experience ourselves with this server, I am only speculating on the
effect of many of these parameters based on the LiteSpeed
documentation, so you will want to experiment a bit...

> E.g.
> Max Connections

You should set this high enough as it is the number of concurrent
requests that can be handled, and with the same value as Instances.

> Initial Request Timeout (secs)
> Retry Timeout (secs)

These 2 timeouts are used to detect problems with your application --
this should depend on the complexity of your application.

> Persistent Connection
> Connection Keepalive Timeout

These options do not apply: Wt itself will close the connection to the
server after each request. I actually thought this was the only
correct way.

> Response Buffering

You probably want to turn this on in order to free the Wt application
as quickly as possible to handle another request/session, while the
response is transmitted to a possibly slow host (only if you are
deploying on the Internet).

> Instances

This should have the same value as Max Connections.

If you are looking for high performance deployment, you should not
discount the wthttpd connector all too quickly. Unlike the FastCGI
deployment many of these performance tuning options (like max
connections) do not apply because the wthttpd is completely async I/O:
it can have as many open connections as needed with virtually no
performance/memory cost, and it will handle as many requests
concurrently as you give it threads. You can also start it behind a
(load-balancing) reverse proxy if you want. It also makes well use of
all the performance tuning options of HTTP 1.1 (persistent
connections, gzip compression, etc...). And it will buffer the
incoming requests and outgoing responses while doing the async I/O
processing.

Our experience is that when using apache as a reverse proxy in
conjunction with wthttpd applications, the apache server is the
bottle-neck with its archaic synchronous I/O architecture, not the Wt
process !

Regards,
koen

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by:
High Quality Requirements in a Collaborative Environment.
Download a free trial of Rational Requirements Composer Now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-ibm-com
_______________________________________________
witty-interest mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/witty-interest

Reply via email to