Scott Smith <sc...@ohlol.net> writes: > Mark Plaksin wrote: > >> Howdy: >> >> How does Passenger perform compared to Mongrel? For us Passenger looks >> worse. We have two puppetmasters; one does file serving, the other does >> everything else. We just started running 0.25 beta2 on both. The >> file-server is running RubyEE + Passenger and the non-file-server is >> running Mongrel. When our heavy-hitter schedule runs the load average >> on our file server spikes much higher than it did when it was running >> 0.25 beta1 with Mongrel. > > Are you running the same # of mongrels as Passenger workers?
Sort of :) We run 12 masters in mongrel. Passenger doesn't seem have a "run at least this many puppetmasters" setting. We set the max to 12 to match mongrel but we never saw more than 6 masters running. We bumped max to 24 late yesterday and I now see 11 masters running. We'll see how it performs during today's big schedule run. > What is your Passenger config? We're using what the docs suggest except MaxPoolSize is now 24: http://github.com/reductivelabs/puppet/tree/607b01e82ea294068fdd554e59bc8e5fe3f9761a/ext/rack/files > What are the specs of your app server? All of our puppetmasters are running on the same size hardware. The machines have 8 cores and 12G of RAM. Do you expect Passenger to perform better? --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
