On Nov 8, 2009, at 1:08 PM, James Y Knight wrote:
>>
>> Can we attach gdb to the process and trigger an all-threads stack
>> dump when it happens?
>
> That's a good idea. Unfortunately, currently it seems to be working
> quite smoothly. :)
The intermittent long pauses were happening again, so I
On Nov 8, 2009, at 9:02 AM, exar...@twistedmatrix.com wrote:
> On 04:26 am, f...@fuhm.net wrote:
>> When I last looked into the performance issues, I found that
>> sometimes
>> trac appears to block for long periods of time without releasing the
>> GIL. That seems to be the core of the performa
Am 08.11.2009, 15:54 Uhr, schrieb Maarten ter Huurne
:
> On Sunday 08 November 2009, James Y Knight wrote:
>
>> When I last looked into the performance issues, I found that sometimes
>> trac appears to block for long periods of time without releasing the
>> GIL. That seems to be the core of the
On Sunday 08 November 2009, James Y Knight wrote:
> When I last looked into the performance issues, I found that sometimes
> trac appears to block for long periods of time without releasing the
> GIL. That seems to be the core of the performance issues, currently.
> When it's responding normally,
On 04:26 am, f...@fuhm.net wrote:
>When I last looked into the performance issues, I found that sometimes
>trac appears to block for long periods of time without releasing the
>GIL. That seems to be the core of the performance issues, currently.
>When it's responding normally, it's perfectly snappy
On 06:26 am, ley...@ihug.co.nz wrote:
>Neither of the below issues will be a problem
>
>Jean-Paul
>Logged in users have a cookie set (I imagine). by default Varnish will
>not present cached results to users with a cookie, nor will it cache
>their results for others to see. So the 10% of hits (tot
On Nov 7, 2009, at 11:26 PM, James Y Knight wrote:
> When I last looked into the performance issues, I found that sometimes
> trac appears to block for long periods of time without releasing the
> GIL. That seems to be the core of the performance issues,
Any Earthly idea which part of trak is re
Neither of the below issues will be a problem
Jean-Paul
Logged in users have a cookie set (I imagine). by default Varnish will not
present cached results to users with a cookie, nor will it cache their results
for others to see. So the 10% of hits (totally my guess) that are for
authenticated u
When I last looked into the performance issues, I found that sometimes
trac appears to block for long periods of time without releasing the
GIL. That seems to be the core of the performance issues, currently.
When it's responding normally, it's perfectly snappy. But, sometimes,
it blocks fo
On 02:55 am, ley...@ihug.co.nz wrote:
>Thanks for the link info.
>
>I literally just set up Varnish for the first time on my web host, so I
>am no pro. However, varnish uses a c like scripting language that can
>run regexps on the incoming urls and apply rules to them.
>
>What this means is that
Thanks for the link info.
I literally just set up Varnish for the first time on my web host, so I
am no pro. However, varnish uses a c like scripting language that can
run regexps on the incoming urls and apply rules to them.
What this means is that we can (as a starting point) choose caching
On 7 Nov, 11:05 pm, exar...@twistedmatrix.com wrote:
>On 10:41 pm, ley...@ihug.co.nz wrote:
>>
>>Isn't the simplest option to place a decent reverse proxy between the
>>webserver and our clients?
>
>Possibly so! I gave this a half-hearted attempted a few weeks ago but
>quickly gave up. If someone
On 7 Nov, 11:56 pm, sstein...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>On Nov 7, 2009, at 6:05 PM, exar...@twistedmatrix.com wrote:
>>Looking at this, I'm reminded that we should try moving the sponsor
>>logos to somewhere else
>
>1> Move any images to CDN of any description (Cloud Files @ rackspace
>does this for free
On Nov 7, 2009, at 6:05 PM, exar...@twistedmatrix.com wrote:
> Looking at this, I'm reminded that we should try moving the sponsor
> logos to somewhere else
1> Move any images to CDN of any description (Cloud Files @ rackspace
does this for free, if I remember correctly, included in the cost of
On 10:41 pm, ley...@ihug.co.nz wrote:
>
>Isn't the simplest option to place a decent reverse proxy between the
>webserver and our clients?
Possibly so! I gave this a half-hearted attempted a few weeks ago but
quickly gave up. If someone who is familiar with configuring such a
proxy would like
Isn't the simplest option to place a decent reverse proxy between the
webserver and our clients?
For example, varnish will cache and proxy simple GETs, so simple views
of the front page and docs (which I imagine is a large chunk of the
traffic) will be offloaded from the webserver:
http://v
16 matches
Mail list logo
