httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Austin Gonyou <aus...@coremetrics.com>
Subject Re: Performance comparison for worker, leader/follower, and threa dpool MPMs
Date Mon, 22 Apr 2002 19:34:40 GMT
Sorry for the late response. 

On Sat, 2002-04-20 at 18:05, Brian Pane wrote: 
> Austin Gonyou wrote:
> 
... 
> >Given that info, is there a way to do:
... 
> Since the switch from mutexes to atomic ops on leader/follower, I'm
> seeing slightly lower mean response times (on par with worker and
> prefork).  The CPU utilization hasn't dropped, but it's still
> competitive
> with prefork.
> 
> >The main reason I'm asking is that if worker is to be replaced, then
> how
> >much longer will it be till Apache 2.0, on *nix is really ready to rock
> >with a threaded model?
> >
> 
> Performance-wise, I think leader/follower might be there already (based
> on its performance compared to prefork).  But it needs more testing.
> 
On this point, what is the possibility of leader/follower having another
issue like worker. 25 is ok, 26 is not? (max threads) 

I'm only curious because I never ran into it, wasn't trying to, but I
also run about 50 forks with 20-25 threads max. So I probably never
would've hit the problem to begin with. 

Anyway..TIA.

> --Brian
> 

-- 
Austin Gonyou
Systems Architect, CCNA
Coremetrics, Inc.
Phone: 512-698-7250
email: austin@coremetrics.com

"It is the part of a good shepherd to shear his flock, not to skin it."
Latin Proverb

Mime
View raw message