Received: by taz.hyperreal.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) id OAA09941; Thu, 2 May 1996 14:13:12 -0700 Received: from gw0.telebase.com by taz.hyperreal.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) with ESMTP id OAA09929; Thu, 2 May 1996 14:13:08 -0700 Received: from wormhole.telebase.com by gw0.telebase.com id RAA05421 for ; Thu, 2 May 1996 17:13:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from spudboy.telebase.com (chuck@spudboy.telebase.com [172.16.2.215]) by wormhole.telebase.com (8.7.1/8.6.9.1) with ESMTP id RAA21057 for ; Thu, 2 May 1996 17:13:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from chuck@localhost) by spudboy.telebase.com (8.6.12/8.6.9.1) id RAA06773 for new-httpd@hyperreal.com; Thu, 2 May 1996 17:13:03 -0400 From: Chuck Murcko Message-Id: <199605022113.RAA06773@telebase.com.> Subject: Re: mod_status again To: new-httpd@hyperreal.com Date: Thu, 2 May 1996 17:13:02 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: from "rasmus@madhaus.utcs.utoronto.ca" at May 2, 96 04:58:09 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Sender: owner-new-httpd@apache.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: new-httpd@hyperreal.com rasmus@madhaus.utcs.utoronto.ca liltingly intones: > > I am using the source patch that you posted to the list (unless you posted > a second patch that I haven't seen yet). > That was the only patch to the list. > > The 1st number of the Accesses and the B1 kByte counts > > refer to the *last* completed connection, and do account for keepalives. > > Hmm.. I have Keep-Alives on and re-loading the status page over and over > again never brings that number above 1. > Hmm. Apparently the second scoreboard update in http_main.c is not tabulating keepalives, then. But the status page is only a single connection, and Netscape 2.x, at least, seems to prefer opening a second or third connection to using a keepalive, at least at the default connection setting of 4. > > For no keepalives, the number will be 1. For keepalives the number is > 1. > > The second Access number is total requests served by this child. Before > > the http_main.c change, both numbers read total requests. > > No, before the change the first number showed the total number of requests > served by the current child process while the second number showed the > total number of requests served by the scoreboard slot. If you had > MaxRequestsPerChild set to 0, then these two numbers were the same. > OK, then. That's how I ran them, and that's what they showed. I see 5-10 as a count in the first column on a pretty large number of connections here, and > 1 on about 7% of active connects. > I don't think the number of requests for the last connection tells > me very much. I'd rather see how many requests this particular process > has served so I can compare that to the amount of memory it is taking up > and thereby adjust my MaxRequestsPerChild setting to keep memory leaking > under control. > You can do this by reverting to the original http_main.c or reversing that part of the patch. The scoreboard slot total *is* the total for the child, though, since that count is cleared when a server dies. chuck Chuck Murcko N2K Inc. Wayne PA chuck@telebase.com And now, on a lighter note: The chicken that clucks the loudest is the one most likely to show up at the steam fitters' picnic.