similar to: Mongrel performing only half as fast as Apache?

is there a way to determine how best to determine the number of mongrel processes to start? Right now i am running 2 in production but I see some people run about 8 or so. What is the cutoff and determening factor for this ? thanks adam -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

Hi- We just finished our app and I tested for performance with httperf. Our setup is browser -> apache2.2-> mod_poxy balancer-> mongrel cluster -> 3 mongrel servers. I have noticed that the total request per second is is about 7.5. When I increase the no of mongrel to 5, it inches up to 8 req/s. My question is how bad or good this number is? We are on a old dell 2400 machine

I tried benchmarking the same site behind an NGINX proxy with both fastcgi and mongrel, and for some reason mongrel is performing pretty poorly in comparison. Any idea what I might be doing wrong? Here''s my benchmarks for 1 fcgi: Server Software: nginx/0.4.0 Server Hostname: eship.com.br Server Port: 80 Document Path: / Document Length: 95

Hello everyone- I am considering using Mongrel and I have read this list pretty extensively. I know that the Apache/mod_proxy_balancer/mongrel approach is the preferred one right now, with Apache serving the static content via mod_rewrite and such. However, in my hardware arsenal, I already have an old and trusty LocalDirector, which I would be inclined to at least try first as a

Hi all, I''ve been spending quite a lot of time trying to install a decent RoR server on my dedicated server (Ubuntu 6.06 LTS), and now, everything works. However, the performances are not really what I had expected... I would like to know what you think about it. Here is my config: 2GHz VIA proc, 1Gb RAM, SATA-II HD. I have apt-got ruby 1.8.4, mysql5 and installed rails 1.1.4 by

<% for demand in @demands %> <% cache(:action => ''list'',:part => article.id) do -%> <%= render :partial => ''article''} %> <% end %> <% end %> Under webrick,the time that list rendering costs will be very soon,but under apache2.2+mongrel_cluster, the rendering still takes a long time- which occupies about 95% of the

If this has already been covered, please point me to that (I didn''t find anything in my searches)... We are using F5 BigIP LTM load balancers. They have many pools of Mongrels they load balance across, and I of course want the F5 to know when a Mongrel goes down or is unavailable, etc. To do that, I need to have an F5 health monitor for HTTP make a request to the Mongrel. We do this

Hi mongrel-users, This is my first post, so I''m not sure if it''s been asked before, but I can''t find an answer anywhere. If I have one rails application running, one processor I''m running it on, and mongrel is multi-threaded, why should I have more than one mongrel running? Everyone seems to agree on 3-5 mongrels per rails app, but why? I must be

Hello Folks, This is the big release of Mongrel that''s been in the works for a while now (well, like a week). It is chock full of changes and features, but mostly it syncs up the Win32 side of things, and validates that Edge Rails works without problems. It also features a more extensive and useful example of the GemPlugins called mongrel_config. First the usual stuff for people

Hi all, My environment is ruby-1.8.4, rails 1.2.2, mongrel 1.0.1, linux 2.6. Now, i have a problem on memory leaks with mongrel. My site is running 5 mongrel processes on a 2G RAM machine, the memory of each process grows from about 20M to about 250M, but it never recover to the initial 20M, so i had to restart the mongrel processes once per day. The load is about 1M hits per day. Waiting for

Hi! I''ve been following the new mongrel tuneup guide (a huge thanks for that btw) and here are my results. I''ve basically only gotten to the point where I''m tuning up 1 mongrel because I suspect I have a performance problem with my rails app. http://mongrel.rubyforge.org/docs/how_many_mongrels.html The first number is the 10s nconns and the second is the max req/s as

Hello all, I''m attempting to test/tune a mongrel cluster according to the tuning instructions on the mongrel site (using httperf). Anecdotally, the site itself ''feels'' snappy, but testing it with httperf reveals what appears to be terrible throughput. I''m kind of at a loss to describe the results, and was hoping someone could verify that I''m testing

I am using mongrel_cluster with mod_proxy_balancer and would like to enable compression (assuming it improves throughtput) and limit file size upload. I configured mod_deflate and LimitRequestSize in Apache, but in my trials looks like the proxied calls bypass those directives (the conf goes below). Is there a way to get this? -- fxn # Adapt this .example locally, as usual. # # To be

more info just 1 server webserver + appserver + dbserver On 9/14/07, Yan Meng <dreamwords at gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, Guys > > Our team is running a web2.0 finance site in China > > http://www.caibangzi.com/ > > We use APACHE + mod_proxy_balancer + mongrel to deploy our application, it > workd super in the past few monthes. > > However, just from last

Lets say you have a site that is serving, oh, around 100k unique visitors a day (plain ole'' browser requests) - plus probably ~ 40k uniques to feeds. Assume this site is 90% read like most of the web, so the traffic looks like your typical news or portal site. There are two web boxes behind a hardware load balancer, each doing apache 2.2.3 -> mongrel_proxy_balancer -> mongrel

Hi all Is there any way to limit the network i/o capacity of virtual machine somehow? Say, I want a domU with id 1 to consume at much 0.5 MB/s of host''s bandwidth. Is it possible? Artem Pervin _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users

Hi all, I encounter timeout errors during file uploads in my Rails application. I think the problem may be in the Mongrel configuration. Here is my setup: * Load balancer (Cisco CSM, my provider''s Catalyst 6509) * Apache 2.2.3 with mod_proxy_balancer * Mongrel 0.3.13.3 * Rails 1.1.6 * Ruby 1.8.4 * MySQL 5.0.22 * file_column I host an application in which users may upload medium files

I''m looking for an easy way to have mongrel only serve dynamic railscontent, while letting Apache serve non-Rails content. Unfortunately,it seems that you have to segregate the static content in its ownfolder. That was also the case with the SCGI runner. I used thetrick outlined athttp://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lang.ruby.rails/23347 to managethis. I was curious if a similar

Rails instances themselves are almost always single-threaded, whereas Mongrel, and it''s acceptor, are multithreaded. In a situation with long-running Rails pages this presents a problem for mod_proxy_balancer. If num_processors is greater than 1 ( default: 950 ), then Mongrel will gladly accept incoming requests and queue them if its rails instance is currently busy. So even

I''m running on a brand new MacBook Pro with a relatively clean working set. using Mongrel in production mode on port 3000. The home page does not hit the database and I''m getting: Processing HomeController#index (for 127.0.0.1 at 2006-06-29 14:59:02) [GET] Session ID: e11f7df52bffff304ca7c88e672ef71a Parameters: {"action"=>"index",