| From: | Shridhar Daithankar <shridhar_daithankar(at)persistent(dot)co(dot)in> |
|---|---|
| To: | "'Pgsql-Performance'" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Caching (was Re: choosing the right platform) |
| Date: | 2003-04-10 09:59:05 |
| Message-ID: | 200304101529.05217.shridhar_daithankar@nospam.persistent.co.in |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Thursday 10 April 2003 15:04, you wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 09:16:36PM -0400, Matthew Nuzum wrote:
> > Thanks for all the feedback, this is very informative.
> >
> > Here are some of the performance suggestions I've heard, please, if I
> > mis-understood, could you help me get clarity?
> > * It's better to run fewer apache children and turn off persistent
> > connections (I had suggested 200 children per server, someone else
> > suggested 40)
>
> Hi Matthew,
>
> I'm coming in a bit late and slightly OT here, but one common Apache
> solution you might want to look at is a "reverse proxy" configuration.
> This works very well if there's a good proportion of static vs dynamic
> content on your site - if your pages contain a lot of graphics then this
> may well be the case.
>
> To do this, you compile 2 Apache servers listening on different ports on
Umm.. AFAIK, if you use fastCGI, persistence of connection should be a lot
better and <self drumming on> or OAS Server, which gives you explicit control
on how much resources to allocate. </self drumming on>
Shridhar
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jean-Luc Lachance | 2003-04-10 14:27:16 | Re: Caching (was Re: choosing the right platform) |
| Previous Message | David McKain | 2003-04-10 09:34:35 | Re: Caching (was Re: choosing the right platform) |