On Friday, Feb 14, 2003, at 07:37 US/Pacific, Matt Sergeant wrote:
This isn't an AxKit specific performance tweak, but rather an overall mod_perl recommendation, but I find running AxKit behind a reverse proxy to be very effective. I have a very simple setup:On Fri, 14 Feb 2003, Kjetil Kjernsmo wrote:While you may have a fat pipe your users might not. Gzipping increasesOn Friday 14 February 2003 15:40, Matt Sergeant wrote:Cool!OK, I've put a page on the wiki about this: http://axkit.org/wiki/view/AxKit/PerformanceTips
About gzipped output: I have a fat pipe to my machine, but a slow CPU,
is still gzipping something that surely should be enabled, or is this a
case that would need further investigations?
perceived performance as well as real performance.
As long as your content is static, its definitely going to increase
performance - think about it this way:
No-Gzip: Request -- Deliver ----------------------------> Recv
Gzip: Request -- Deliver -----> Recv
Now when that server has finished it can go back to idle or delivering to
another client.
PIII-750 w/512M RAM serving AxKit pages
Celeron-400 w/1024M RAM using Squid to reverse-proxy to AxKit
Using the handy little "ab" utility, I'm able to serve 460 requests per second, while my poor little AxKit machine is only capable of about 20-30 rps normally. My content is pretty easily cachable however, though I find that even for non-cached pages, using the reverse proxy increases performance since AxKit's heavy-weight httpd processes don't need to spoon-feed page results to a client. It also prevents your main server from sending static images when they could be better served to doing what only it can do - running AxKit.
--
Michael A Nachbaur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
