Hi Sage,
Is there any timeline around the switch? So that we can plan ahead for the 
testing.

We are running apache + mod-fastcgi in production at scale (540 OSDs, 9 RGW 
hosts) and it looks good so far. Although at the beginning we came across a 
problem with large volume of 500 error, which tracked to that mod-fastcgi is 
using "select" which limits to 1024 FDs. We used "poll" to replace "select" and 
the problem was solved.

Thanks,
Guang


----------------------------------------
> Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 11:31:54 -0800
> From: sw...@redhat.com
> To: ceph-us...@ceph.com; ceph-de...@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: [ceph-users] who is using radosgw with civetweb?
>
> Hey,
>
> We are considering switching to civetweb (the embedded/standalone rgw web
> server) as the primary supported RGW frontend instead of the current
> apache + mod-fastcgi or mod-proxy-fcgi approach. "Supported" here means
> both the primary platform the upstream development focuses on and what the
> downstream Red Hat product will officially support.
>
> How many people are using RGW standalone using the embedded civetweb
> server instead of apache? In production? At what scale? What
> version(s) (civetweb first appeared in firefly and we've backported most
> fixes).
>
> Have you seen any problems? Any other feedback? The hope is to (vastly)
> simplify deployment.
>
> Thanks!
> sage
> _______________________________________________
> ceph-users mailing list
> ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
                                          
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com

Reply via email to