On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 6:05 AM, Mark Plaksin<ha...@usg.edu> wrote:
>
> 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.

You won't see more passenger instances than the number of simultaneous
connections.



>
>> 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?
>
>
> >
>



-- 
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to