httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeffrey Burgoyne <>
Subject Re: Puzzling News
Date Mon, 28 Feb 2005 23:24:47 GMT
I can go even one step further. 255 servers, 2.5 Gig of ram, huge config
(200 virtuals hosts, 1500 redirect rules, 2000 rewrite rules, 300 proxy
rules) and I never go into swap using prefork.

Mind you, no PHP, and that helps significantly.

I'll max out on CPU long before memory is all likelyhood, so worker offers
no advantages. I'd say in a large enterprise system where RAM is expensive
with maybe 8 CPU's, then worker may make sense. For smaller scale out
installations, no need.

Jeffrey Burgoyne

Chief Technology Architect
KCSI Keenuh Consulting Services Inc

On Mon, 28 Feb 2005, Paul A. Houle wrote:

> On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 21:31:19 +0000, Wayne S. Frazee <>
> wrote:
> >
> > Correct me if I am wrong, but I have seen much that would purport the
> > worker MPM to deliever gains in terms of capacity handling and
> > capacity-burst-handling as well as slimming down the resource footprint
> > of the Apache 2 server on a running system under normal load conditions.
> 	Well,  our big production machine has 6G of RAM and never gets close to
> running out even in testing when we stacked it up to the (compiled in)
> limit of 255 processes.  Under normal operations we have 50 running,
> mostly because of keep-alive (helps a lot with the performance of our
> cookie-based authentication system) and people downloading moderately big
> (>100k) files.
> 	Even though RAM is pretty cheap,  there probably are people who are more
> constrained.
> > I would also like to point out I too have seen inconclusive evidence on
> > MPM "advantage".  I think that is part of the problem... without a clear
> > business-case-defendable advantage to the features implemented in Apache
> > 2... why upgrade?
> 	Altruism.  If people don't use Apache 2,  then Apache development will
> keep going sideways forever.

View raw message