I've been trying to reproduce your results, and got mixed results myself. I did a similar test with puppet-test (ignoring for a second that a major memory abuser is the file copying) i did simple compile tests.
the setup include 3 main scenarios: 1. latest passenger + ree 2. passenger with RHEL5 ruby 3. simple mongrel setup with RHEL5. for fun, I also added a yaml/marshal comparison. my test client was always the same with this arguments: /puppet-test --server serverX --fork 5 --catalog_format marshal/yaml --repeat 10 according to my calculation 60 (1+5 fork x 10) clients is at least 60 clients per minute ==> 1800 clients per puppetmaster. my output is: passenger + ree + marshal: AVG: 42.4674576271186, OK: 59 failed: 1 passenger + ree + yaml: AVG: 46.9481666666667, OK: 60 failed: 0 passenger + RHE5 ruby / marshal: AVG: 50.6046666666667, OK: 60 failed: 0 passenger + RHE5 ruby / yaml: AVG: 52.1456666666667, OK: 60 failed: 0 mongrel (4 processes) + with RHE5 ruby / marshal: AVG: 48.5047272727273, OK: 55 failed: 5 mongrel (4 processes) + with RHE5 ruby / yaml: AVG: 38.0254347826087, OK: 46 failed: 14 as it goes for memory consumptions, no surprises here, passenger processes retain within 100mb per process, mongrel went to an average of 220mb, however, passenger used 6 processes, and mongrel only 4.. so maybe I could run 6 mongrels and compare further. I did not see a huge different in memory consumption between REE and normal RHE5 ruby when using passenger. *in my setup, failed are clients who didnt get a catalog within 120 seconds. Nigel, I'm surpized how you got such a different values for compile time, could it be that you server was swapping? another side effect that I found in more than one occasion that if I killed the puppet-test, the passenger processes went on for a long time ( I killed them manually after 15 minutes) and passenger-status reported that there are no active processes but cpu usage was 100%..... so bottom line so far, even if you have a balanced mongrel / cpu /client ratio, performance-wise there is a slight difference towards ree (in my tests), passenger is handling memory usage better than mongrels, but maybe have some hiccups and handles high load much better than mongrels... Ohad On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 9:35 AM, Nigel Kersten <nig...@google.com> wrote: > > This was: > > ruby 1.8.4 (2005-12-24) [x86_64-linux] > vs > ruby 1.8.6 (2008-08-11 patchlevel 287) [x86_64-linux] > Ruby Enterprise Edition 20090421 > > on Ubuntu Dapper, using Passenger with Apache. > > I used the puppet-test script in the ext/ directory to simulate 50 > simultaneous runs with a repeat of 10. Both runs ran from the same > clean state. > > I measured peak memory usage and total catalog compilation time (ie > adding up the "compiled catalog in xxx.x seconds" output) with our > actual Puppet configuration. > > > Ruby 1.8.4: > peak memory consumption: 2686 MB > total catalog compilation time: 26632 seconds > > > Ruby EE 20090421: > peak memory consumption: 1462 MB > total catalog compilation time: 13693.5 seconds > > > wow. > > > -- > Nigel Kersten > nig...@google.com > System Administrator > Google, Inc. > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
