httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "harish kulkarni" <>
Subject Re: Simple MPM is in trunk
Date Wed, 12 Nov 2008 05:00:24 GMT
Hi Paul and others,

We are planning to use apache in forward proxy mode, but in case the server
response has latency of 2+secs.. we see that to support high traffic say
5K/sec we require huge number of threads. We see a huge CPU usage...
Just to take an example to support 3K req/secs we have to have 3K+ threads.

Is there some thing wrong in our configuration ? Please suggest us if we
have to do any changes in confirguration and just wanted to know using
apache as forward proxy with high request rate as we are talking about would
be a good choice?.

we are using single process model with event_mpm.

But when  we run the same load on lighty we see good performance.

Is simple MPM is going to add any good value to help get good performance
from apache?. Is it going to true event driven model?.


On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 12:42 PM, Paul Querna <> wrote:

> I've added the Simple MPM to trunk:
> It isn't a fork on the previous MPMs, it is a about as clean room as it can
> get, and tries to keep every part of the MPM compartmentalized. At the same
> time it uses APR and APR-Util as much as possible.
> One of the major departures is that it doesn't use any of the functions
> from os/unixd/, which I believe is a good long term decision, since I would
> like to get the MPM working on Windows.
> I believe this MPM should be the default in 2.4 on Unix platforms.
> It obviously isn't ready yet, but I believe it lays a good foundation on a
> hybrid threading/event model that will let Apache 2.4 do more with less
> resources.
> What works:
> - You can run httpd -X, and it creates the main event loop, registers
> listener sockets, and can serve some basic http pages.
> - Normal command line things like -t, -V, etc all should work as expected.
> What doesn't work:
> - The name.  Someone suggest something better than "Simple".
> - Spawning children processes.
> - Keepalive has some issues.
> - Timeouts.  Need _lots_ of thought on how to manage a timeout system with
> pools for the connection, right now its too easy to register a timer with a
> baton allocated out of a pool that gets destroyed.
> - Lots of things, patches welcome :-)
> What is on purpose:
> - SimpleProcCount and SimpleThreadCount.  I hate MaxClients,
> MinSpareThreads, MaxSpareThreads, ThreadsPerChild, ThreadLimit,
> StartServers, StartThreads, and ServerLimit. They are all going to die in
> 2.4.
> Thoughts?
> Thanks,
> Paul

View raw message