After reading the digital shortcut and the documentation on the web site I''m confused. Which one should I use? pen, balance or nginx ? I don''t want to use a behemoth like appache and ssl is not needed so it reduces my choice to those three only.... What are the pros and cons of each? I don''t have much money, so the less ressources I use the better it is for me.... As an additional question, how far would a one server configuration get me? I''m going to be serving a lot of pictures and have some simple treatment of photos (resizing and such) ___________________________________________________________________________ D?couvrez une nouvelle fa?on d''obtenir des r?ponses ? toutes vos questions ! Profitez des connaissances, des opinions et des exp?riences des internautes sur Yahoo! Questions/R?ponses http://fr.answers.yahoo.com
On 2/26/07, tom wang <tomawng at yahoo.fr> wrote:> As an additional question, how far would a one server > configuration get me? I''m going to be serving a lot of > pictures and have some simple treatment of photos > (resizing and such)I think that depends on a lot of unnamed factors. What kind of server? What framework? I serve 65 commercial sites and applications, with potential throughputs on dynamic traffic as high as 350 requests/second on an older dual AMD processor based Linux box with 2gb of RAM, and a number of those sites are using Mongrel processes for their backend. I don''t use Rails, though, so your mileage will probably vary quite a lot from that if you do. Kirk Haines
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 06:48:21 +0100 (CET) tom wang <tomawng at yahoo.fr> wrote:> After reading the digital shortcut and the > documentation on the web site I''m confused. > Which one should I use? pen, balance or nginx ? > > I don''t want to use a behemoth like appache and ssl is > not needed so it reduces my choice to those three > only....I''d go with nginx since it''s about as difficult to compile and install as pen and balance, and isn''t too hard to configure.> What are the pros and cons of each? I don''t have much > money, so the less ressources I use the better it is > for me.... > > As an additional question, how far would a one server > configuration get me? I''m going to be serving a lot of > pictures and have some simple treatment of photos > (resizing and such)You can''t know until you try. Just start off with one server, then add as you need. -- Zed A. Shaw, MUDCRAP-CE Master Black Belt Sifu http://www.zedshaw.com/ http://www.awprofessional.com/title/0321483502 -- The Mongrel Book http://mongrel.rubyforge.org/ http://www.lingr.com/room/3yXhqKbfPy8 -- Come get help.
Having multiple servers has been a must in my experience with Mongrel, mainly because if a task is database / IO bound then other users have to wait for it. I''m using Lighttpd => Pound => 10 Mongrels right now. Lighttpd just released a new version (1.5), which has the ability to directly contact multiple mongrels. I''ll likely upgrade to this later in the week. Then I''ll just have Lighttpd => 10 Mongrels Hope this helps, Pete On Feb 26, 2007, at 9:48 PM, tom wang wrote:> After reading the digital shortcut and the > documentation on the web site I''m confused. > Which one should I use? pen, balance or nginx ? > > I don''t want to use a behemoth like appache and ssl is > not needed so it reduces my choice to those three > only.... > > What are the pros and cons of each? I don''t have much > money, so the less ressources I use the better it is > for me.... > > As an additional question, how far would a one server > configuration get me? I''m going to be serving a lot of > pictures and have some simple treatment of photos > (resizing and such) > > > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > _____ > D?couvrez une nouvelle fa?on d''obtenir des r?ponses ? toutes vos > questions ! > Profitez des connaissances, des opinions et des exp?riences des > internautes sur Yahoo! Questions/R?ponses > http://fr.answers.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > Mongrel-users mailing list > Mongrel-users at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/mongrel-users-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/mongrel-users/attachments/20070227/acb5e040/attachment.html
Sorry if this is a little off-topic, but might I ask what your hardware setup/config is for ten mongrels? Thanks, - Paul On 27/02/07, Pete DeLaurentis <pete at nextengine.com> wrote:> > Having multiple servers has been a must in my experience with Mongrel, > mainly because if a task is database / IO bound then other users have to > wait for it. > > I''m using Lighttpd => Pound => 10 Mongrels right now. > > Lighttpd just released a new version (1.5), which has the ability to > directly contact multiple mongrels. > > I''ll likely upgrade to this later in the week. Then I''ll just have Lighttpd > => 10 Mongrels > > > Hope this helps, > Pete > > > On Feb 26, 2007, at 9:48 PM, tom wang wrote: > > After reading the digital shortcut and the > documentation on the web site I''m confused. > Which one should I use? pen, balance or nginx ? > > I don''t want to use a behemoth like appache and ssl is > not needed so it reduces my choice to those three > only.... > > What are the pros and cons of each? I don''t have much > money, so the less ressources I use the better it is > for me.... > > As an additional question, how far would a one server > configuration get me? I''m going to be serving a lot of > pictures and have some simple treatment of photos > (resizing and such) > > > > > > > > > > > > > ___________________________________________________________________________ > D?couvrez une nouvelle fa?on d''obtenir des r?ponses ? toutes vos questions > ! > Profitez des connaissances, des opinions et des exp?riences des internautes > sur Yahoo! Questions/R?ponses > http://fr.answers.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > Mongrel-users mailing list > Mongrel-users at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/mongrel-users > > _______________________________________________ > Mongrel-users mailing list > Mongrel-users at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/mongrel-users >
Sure, they''re running on a PowerEdge 1950 (Dual Core Xeon). I have several of these boxes, each running multiple Mongrels. There is a separate DB server running Mysql, and a load balancer (homemade) that routes to the different boxes. Im doing quite a bit of file serving + heavy DB queries, so my application is very much IO bound. I started with the standard 4 mongrels, but found I could get a lot more out of each server with 10. -Pete On Feb 27, 2007, at 2:26 PM, Paul King wrote:> Sorry if this is a little off-topic, but might I ask what your > hardware setup/config is for ten mongrels? > > Thanks, > - Paul > > On 27/02/07, Pete DeLaurentis <pete at nextengine.com> wrote: >> >> Having multiple servers has been a must in my experience with >> Mongrel, >> mainly because if a task is database / IO bound then other users >> have to >> wait for it. >> >> I''m using Lighttpd => Pound => 10 Mongrels right now. >> >> Lighttpd just released a new version (1.5), which has the ability to >> directly contact multiple mongrels. >> >> I''ll likely upgrade to this later in the week. Then I''ll just >> have Lighttpd >> => 10 Mongrels >> >> >> Hope this helps, >> Pete >> >> >> On Feb 26, 2007, at 9:48 PM, tom wang wrote: >> >> After reading the digital shortcut and the >> documentation on the web site I''m confused. >> Which one should I use? pen, balance or nginx ? >> >> I don''t want to use a behemoth like appache and ssl is >> not needed so it reduces my choice to those three >> only.... >> >> What are the pros and cons of each? I don''t have much >> money, so the less ressources I use the better it is >> for me.... >> >> As an additional question, how far would a one server >> configuration get me? I''m going to be serving a lot of >> pictures and have some simple treatment of photos >> (resizing and such) >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _____________________________________________________________________ >> ______ >> D?couvrez une nouvelle fa?on d''obtenir des r?ponses ? toutes vos >> questions >> ! >> Profitez des connaissances, des opinions et des exp?riences des >> internautes >> sur Yahoo! Questions/R?ponses >> http://fr.answers.yahoo.com >> _______________________________________________ >> Mongrel-users mailing list >> Mongrel-users at rubyforge.org >> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/mongrel-users >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Mongrel-users mailing list >> Mongrel-users at rubyforge.org >> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/mongrel-users >> > _______________________________________________ > Mongrel-users mailing list > Mongrel-users at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/mongrel-users
On 2/27/07, Paul King <cronald at gmail.com> wrote:> > Sorry if this is a little off-topic, but might I ask what your > hardware setup/config is for ten mongrels? > > Thanks, > - Paul > > On 27/02/07, Pete DeLaurentis <pete at nextengine.com> wrote: > > > > Having multiple servers has been a must in my experience with Mongrel, > > mainly because if a task is database / IO bound then other users have to > > wait for it. > > > > I''m using Lighttpd => Pound => 10 Mongrels right now. > > > > Lighttpd just released a new version (1.5), which has the ability to > > directly contact multiple mongrels. > > > > I''ll likely upgrade to this later in the week. Then I''ll just have > Lighttpd > > => 10 Mongrels > > > > > > Hope this helps, > > Pete > > > > > > On Feb 26, 2007, at 9:48 PM, tom wang wrote: > > > > After reading the digital shortcut and the > > documentation on the web site I''m confused. > > Which one should I use? pen, balance or nginx ? > > > > I don''t want to use a behemoth like appache and ssl is > > not needed so it reduces my choice to those three > > only.... > > > > What are the pros and cons of each? I don''t have much > > money, so the less ressources I use the better it is > > for me.... > > > > As an additional question, how far would a one server > > configuration get me? I''m going to be serving a lot of > > pictures and have some simple treatment of photos > > (resizing and such) > >You really wanna consider nginx. Check their wiki on mongrel+rails http://wiki.codemongers.com/NginxRubyonRailsMongrel It can do all yoru static images and you can add servers to your mongrel cluster as needed. It''s gonna be a lot smaller than apache, and you can easily do ssl with it if you want. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/mongrel-users/attachments/20070227/63219d8f/attachment-0001.html
On 2/27/07, Pete DeLaurentis <pete at nextengine.com> wrote:> > Having multiple servers has been a must in my experience with Mongrel, > mainly because if a task is database / IO bound then other users have to > wait for it. > > I''m using Lighttpd => Pound => 10 Mongrels right now.No, it isn''t a must for Mongrel. It may be a must for Rails, but it isn''t a must for Mongrel. There is a difference. It''s often blurred in both questions and responses, but Mongrel is far more than just a Rails platform. Kirk Haines
Right on Kirk... I''m using Rails, and often forget there are other things Mongrel is being used with. -Pete On Feb 27, 2007, at 4:18 PM, Kirk Haines wrote:> On 2/27/07, Pete DeLaurentis <pete at nextengine.com> wrote: >> >> Having multiple servers has been a must in my experience with >> Mongrel, >> mainly because if a task is database / IO bound then other users >> have to >> wait for it. >> >> I''m using Lighttpd => Pound => 10 Mongrels right now. > > No, it isn''t a must for Mongrel. It may be a must for Rails, but it > isn''t a must for Mongrel. There is a difference. It''s often blurred > in both questions and responses, but Mongrel is far more than just a > Rails platform. > > > Kirk Haines > _______________________________________________ > Mongrel-users mailing list > Mongrel-users at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/mongrel-users
On 2/27/07, Kirk Haines <wyhaines at gmail.com> wrote:> > On 2/27/07, Pete DeLaurentis <pete at nextengine.com> wrote: > > > > Having multiple servers has been a must in my experience with Mongrel, > > mainly because if a task is database / IO bound then other users have to > > wait for it. > > > > I''m using Lighttpd => Pound => 10 Mongrels right now. > > No, it isn''t a must for Mongrel. It may be a must for Rails, but it > isn''t a must for Mongrel. There is a difference. It''s often blurred > in both questions and responses, but Mongrel is far more than just a > Rails platform.This is true. However, his assertion is valid: it''s a must for any web app that uses blocking API calls, like executing queries using the native mysql and postgres clients. That''s just life with Ruby threads. jeremy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/mongrel-users/attachments/20070228/c91a2e6f/attachment-0001.html
On 2/28/07, Jeremy Kemper <jeremy at bitsweat.net> wrote:> This is true. However, his assertion is valid: it''s a must for any web app > that uses blocking API calls, like executing queries using the native mysql > and postgres clients. That''s just life with Ruby threads.I have oodles of dynamic web sites and applications that make blocking API calls yet can still sustain hit rates in the 50-200/second range (depending on the site) under a single mongrel. They bear up just fine to bursty traffic when people are checking their fund prices in the evenings. There are situations where clustering multiple backends is necessary, for sure, but it''s possible to handle an exceptional amount of dynamic, db-interactive traffic in a single ruby process. Kirk Haines
On 2/28/07, Kirk Haines <wyhaines at gmail.com> wrote:> > On 2/28/07, Jeremy Kemper <jeremy at bitsweat.net> wrote: > > > This is true. However, his assertion is valid: it''s a must for any web > app > > that uses blocking API calls, like executing queries using the native > mysql > > and postgres clients. That''s just life with Ruby threads. > > I have oodles of dynamic web sites and applications that make blocking > API calls yet can still sustain hit rates in the 50-200/second range > (depending on the site) under a single mongrel. They bear up just > fine to bursty traffic when people are checking their fund prices in > the evenings.Great anecdote. I''ve had similar experience with Mongrel. There are situations where clustering multiple backends is necessary,> for sure, but it''s possible to handle an exceptional amount of > dynamic, db-interactive traffic in a single ruby process."It''s a must" is too strong. I meant to illuminate that it''s not just a "must for Rails." That''s true for other reasons. For example: you have an operation that obtains a write lock on a db row and does some work. Concurrent requests ought to just wait on the lock and proceed when available, but Ruby threads will deadlock on the API call since waiting on the lock prevents the worker thread that obtained it from finishing. Whether this is an edge case or a common case is up to your application. I think a preforking Mongrel would be the biggest positive change for Ruby web app deployment since its introduction. Nearly zero config; just gem install and go. jeremy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/mongrel-users/attachments/20070228/9e4b72d5/attachment.html
On 2/28/07, Zed A. Shaw <zedshaw at zedshaw.com> wrote:> > ... and eventually people will start asking why there''s nearly 10 other > Ruby web frameworks that run fine in Mongrel without a big lock and do > nearly the same things as Rails or even use the same technologies as > Rails.Yep. I look forward to it, mostly. Often I''m too quick to write it off since I''m more accustomed to being beaten with it as a FUD stick. jeremy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/mongrel-users/attachments/20070228/92fc8ecd/attachment.html
On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 12:57:02 -0800 "Jeremy Kemper" <jeremy at bitsweat.net> wrote:> On 2/27/07, Kirk Haines <wyhaines at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On 2/27/07, Pete DeLaurentis <pete at nextengine.com> wrote: > > > > > > Having multiple servers has been a must in my experience with Mongrel, > > > mainly because if a task is database / IO bound then other users have to > > > wait for it. > > > > > > I''m using Lighttpd => Pound => 10 Mongrels right now. > > > > No, it isn''t a must for Mongrel. It may be a must for Rails, but it > > isn''t a must for Mongrel. There is a difference. It''s often blurred > > in both questions and responses, but Mongrel is far more than just a > > Rails platform. > > > This is true. However, his assertion is valid: it''s a must for any web app > that uses blocking API calls, like executing queries using the native mysql > and postgres clients. That''s just life with Ruby threads.... and eventually people will start asking why there''s nearly 10 other Ruby web frameworks that run fine in Mongrel without a big lock and do nearly the same things as Rails or even use the same technologies as Rails. -- Zed A. Shaw, MUDCRAP-CE Master Black Belt Sifu http://www.zedshaw.com/ http://www.awprofessional.com/title/0321483502 -- The Mongrel Book http://mongrel.rubyforge.org/ http://www.lingr.com/room/3yXhqKbfPy8 -- Come get help.
I would definitely check out using nginx. I have set it up a number of times for production sites using rails and nginx and mongrel and it has performed incredibly well. If you want a good walkthrough installing and configuring it with rails and several mongrels check out Kyle Kochis''s blog - kyledev.blogspot.com. Craig Kuhns
Thanks a lot everybody for the answer, I''m going to use nginx together with a pack of mongrels.... I hadn''t thought there was so much difference between the different web framework on ruby (ie. why isn''t rails threadsafe? ) but since I''m going to go with rails, I''ll have to have more mongrels process if I understand correctly.... A bit offtopic, what do you people think of grids like applogic (http://www.3tera.com/applogic.html, http://www.thegridlayer.com/index.php), is it a good solution to scale the system has more and more requests are being made? Has anybody ever tried using it? Another question I had is what do you think of using gentoo for the server, I have a lot of experience in using it as my primary desktop operating system (before I switched to mac) but I wonder if it''s a good idea on a server.... The tendency to have problems when a gentoo installation had not been updated for a long time and you suddenly update worries me. Again, thanks and thanks Zed for developing mongrel --- Craig Kuhns <craigkuhns at gmail.com> a ?crit?:> I would definitely check out using nginx. I have > set it up a number > of times for production sites using rails and nginx > and mongrel and it > has performed incredibly well. If you want a good > walkthrough > installing and configuring it with rails and several > mongrels check > out Kyle Kochis''s blog - kyledev.blogspot.com. > > Craig Kuhns > _______________________________________________ > Mongrel-users mailing list > Mongrel-users at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/mongrel-users >___________________________________________________________________________ D?couvrez une nouvelle fa?on d''obtenir des r?ponses ? toutes vos questions ! Profitez des connaissances, des opinions et des exp?riences des internautes sur Yahoo! Questions/R?ponses http://fr.answers.yahoo.com