On 2/9/07, Perrin Harkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 2/8/07, Jeffrey Ng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have read practical mod_perl. I tried to preload many of our modules
in
> startup.pl. But the shared memory value doesnt change at all. Also,
doesnt
> 5.7M shared memory usage sound too small comparing to the 92.6M total
size?
You're not looking at the right thing there. This is not actual
shared memory, but rather copy-on-write sharing. It will never show
in your SHARE section. On versions of Linux with a 2.6 kernel, you
can use the techniques in Apache::SizeLimit to get a sesne of how much
sharing is going. This doesn't work with older kernels.
A reliable way to tell if your sharing is improved is to start up
apache without preloading and look at the available memory from
"free", and then put in the preloading and restart apache and check it
again. You should have more free memory after preloading, allowing
you to run more processes.
when i run this "free" test, should i run it on the live server, or on a
test server with single process apache mode?
here's the result on a live server:
total used free shared buffers cached
Mem: 4150972 2654016 1496956 0 27548 1313344
-/+ buffers/cache: 1313124 2837848
Swap: 8385912 6920 8378992
and here's the top results on one of the server:
top - 14:21:55 up 144 days, 9:30, 0 users, load average: 19.30, 18.65,
12.27
Tasks: 87 total, 1 running, 86 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie
Cpu(s): 69.6% us, 1.3% sy, 0.0% ni, 27.7% id, 0.0% wa, 0.2% hi, 1.2% si
Mem: 4150972k total, 2623968k used, 1527004k free, 27380k buffers
Swap: 8385912k total, 6920k used, 8378992k free, 1312832k cached
PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
26343 apache 15 0 97196 83m 6236 S 10.0 2.1 0:08.69 httpd
26340 apache 15 0 94740 81m 5896 S 7.8 2.0 0:07.62 httpd
26315 apache 15 0 95552 81m 5896 S 7.4 2.0 0:08.31 httpd
26326 apache 15 0 94836 81m 5868 S 7.4 2.0 0:08.17 httpd
26371 apache 15 0 95496 81m 5872 S 7.4 2.0 0:08.21 httpd
I set the maxserver as 60.
Our CPU load is extremely high. But the actual RAM usage is not high at all.
we are using only 260 gig out of 400 gig. From our top results, does it look
like the memory usage of our processes is the bottleneck?
- Perrin
_______________________________________________
List: [email protected]
Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
Searchable archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/
--
Jeffrey Ng
CEO, Zorpia.com
_______________________________________________
List: [email protected]
Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/
