That's fine, but I'm not running 7.3, I'm running 7.2. I'll read up one the things below and use that for tweaking. Dennis is running 7.3 and I'm sure he'll be interested in this as well.
~Todd On Mon, 9 Sep 2002, Jesse Noller wrote: > Hmm. > > Ok, like I said, red hat 7.3 is problematic because of alterations to the Glibc >binaries. > > Now, some things you can try (and I haven't tried these myself, BE WARNED): > > 1: Update to the latest Red Hat patches > 2: Change the JRE CFMX is using to the latest JRE from IBM for Linux > 3: Matt Liotta shot me this last night: > http://www-124.ibm.com/developerworks/oss/pthreads/ > > While this may NOT help speed (not detracting) it may seriously help stability. > > 4: Something from my noted on Java-Linux > > > Threads > > Limitations on threads are tightly tied to both file descriptor limits, and process >limits. > > Under Linux, threads are counted as processes, so any limits to the number of >processes also applies to threads. In a heavily threaded app like a threaded TCP >engine, or a java server, you can quickly run out of threads. > > For starters, you want to get an idea how many threads you can open. The >`thread-limit` util mentioned in the Tuning Utilities section is probabaly as good as >any. > > The first step to increasing the possible number of threads is to make sure you have >boosted any process limits as mentioned before. > > There are few things that can limit the number of threads, including process limits, >memory limits, mutex/semaphore/shm/ipc limits, and compiled in thread limits. For >most cases, the process limit is the first one to run into, then the compiled in >thread limits, then the memory limits. > > To increase the limits, you have to recompile glibc. Oh fun!. And the patch is >essentially two lines!. Woohoo! > > > --- ./linuxthreads/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/bits/local_lim.h.akl Mon Sep 4 > 19:37:42 2000 > +++ ./linuxthreads/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/bits/local_lim.h Mon Sep 4 > 19:37:56 2000 > @@ -64,7 +64,7 @@ > /* The number of threads per process. */ > #define _POSIX_THREAD_THREADS_MAX 64 > /* This is the value this implementation supports. */ > -#define PTHREAD_THREADS_MAX 1024 > +#define PTHREAD_THREADS_MAX 8192 > > /* Maximum amount by which a process can descrease its asynchronous I/O > priority level. */ > --- ./linuxthreads/internals.h.akl Mon Sep 4 19:36:58 2000 > +++ ./linuxthreads/internals.h Mon Sep 4 19:37:23 2000 > @@ -330,7 +330,7 @@ > THREAD_SELF implementation is used, this must be a power of two and > a multiple of PAGE_SIZE. */ > #ifndef STACK_SIZE > -#define STACK_SIZE (2 * 1024 * 1024) > +#define STACK_SIZE (64 * PAGE_SIZE) > #endif > > /* The initial size of the thread stack. Must be a multiple of PAGE_SIZE. > * */ > > Now just patch glibc, rebuild, and install it. ;-> If you have a package based >system, I seriously suggest making a new package and using it. > > Two references on how to do this are Jlinux.org, and Volano.Both describe how to >increase the number of threads so Java apps can use them. > > > http://www.jlinux.org/server.html > > 5: The problem seems to be a Java-Thread Vs. The Linux Thread model issue. I haven't >recreated this in house (I'd probably need to steal your apps and run it under mild >load) > > This problem disturbs me mainly because I have such a distrust of the threading >models Java AND Linux utilize. We even had problems with CF5 and Linux Threading >(That's why we linked against old Glib libraries boy and girls, they were more >reliable). > > Recreating this would be interesting, but possibly fruitless because we can't really >do anything to fix Linux or Java threading. > > Matt Liotta could talk about this more too, I know he's been running CFMX-Linux for >some time. > > Jesse Noller > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Macromedia Server Development > Unix/Linux "special guy" > > "But I neeeeed tacos! I need them or I will > explode! That happens to me sometimes!" -GIR > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: dennis baldwin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Monday, September 09, 2002 10:00 AM > > To: CF-Talk > > Subject: RE: FlashCFM.com > > > > Jesse, > > > > You're right, this is popping up all over the place and I've tried so > > many different fixes that I'm not sure what's right anymore. We're not > > running verity at all and only have about 10 sites on this box. They > > were running fine on CF 5 and with MX these threads just start to spawn > > and eventually kill the server. I've read all kinds of stuff in the MM > > forums and the latest thing I've caught wind of is that it this will be > > resolved if we run Apache 2.0. We're getting ready to launch an MX > > resource site that focuses on Remoting, Flash Comm, etc. and I just want > > to make sure that we can deploy the site without having to worry about > > rebooting it every few days. If you're interested we're on: > > > > RH 7.3 > > Apache 1.3.23 > > MySQL 3.23.49 > > > > Thanks for any advice or suggestions you can offer. > > > > Regards, > > Dennis > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Jesse Noller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Monday, September 09, 2002 8:53 AM > > To: CF-Talk > > Subject: RE: FlashCFM.com > > > > > > Interesting... > > > > This seems to be popping up quite a bit, the nearest thing I can > > think of is the fact that people seem to have CFML applications that > > have long running calls that spawn extra processes. > > > > That being said todd, you should tell your friend that Red Hat > > 7.3 has problems with Verity. > > > > Also, please note that the Apache module doesn't regulate number > > of spawned threads. > > > > Jesse Noller > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Macromedia Server Development > > Unix/Linux "special guy" > > > > "But I neeeeed tacos! I need them or I will > > explode! That happens to me sometimes!" -GIR > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Monday, September 09, 2002 10:05 AM > > > To: CF-Talk > > > Subject: FlashCFM.com > > > > > > Dennis got FlashCFM.com back up. We're not having much luck with CFMX > > > > > / Linux 7.3 / Apache 1.3.x -- Dennis informed me that he might be > > > upgrading it to Apache 2 soon, not sure. He read that the java > > > thread/processes settled down some under Apache 2... not sure why it > > > would make a difference. > > > > > > I noticed when I got back from visiting my parents that I had about > > > 700 cfmx java processes/threads myself and I had to kill it and > > > restart it. I'm running Apache 1.3.x / CFMX / RH 7.2 myself. > > > > > > ~Todd > > > > > > -- ============================================================ > > > Todd Rafferty ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - http://www.web-rat.com/ | > > > Team Macromedia Volunteer for ColdFusion | > > > http://www.macromedia.com/support/forums/team_macromedia/ | > > > http://www.flashCFM.com/ - webRat (Moderator) | > > > http://www.ultrashock.com/ - webRat (Back-end Moderator) | > > > ============================================================ > > > > > > > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
