Hey everyone!

I'm *not* using PHP anywhere...
My application is a TurboGears application, which is running it's on server
and Cherokee is standing infront of it as a Reverse Proxy. For what it worth
- it's a Python application.

Alvaro, I'll try to test r3488 and report here.
Meanwhile I did this test:
I reverted only handler_proxy.c to r3165, which seems to me like the first
change since 0.99.20, and it didn't help.
I checked the same TurboGears server - when connecting directly it all
works, and through Cherokee 0.99.22 I get '502 Bad Gateway'. I noticed that
Cherokee says "NOTICE: Taking source='localhost:8008' off-line" when I try
to get the page, and after a while it takes the source 'back on-line'. It
happens for all my sources (not just the one on port 8008), of course, on
the same pages.

Thank you.
Yo'av

2009/8/13 LinuxInsight <[email protected]>

> Yo'av Moshe wrote:
>
>> Hey,
>> Anyone seen this behavior? Any ideas on what to check?
>> As I said, I'm pretty sure something has changed with Cherokee between
>> 0.99.20 to 0.99.21 that causes these "502 Bad Gateway" errors.
>>
>> My server is a production server and I'm right now it's not quite working
>> as it should... :-p
>>
>>
> Yo'av, don't know enough about your setup, sorry, joined list just today.
>
> But, from some extensive testing I did few days ago, I know one thing.
> Using UNIX sockets for communication between cherokee and php-cgi farm is
> very fragile. At some point in time, under high load, php-cgi's become
> unresponsive and cherokee starts retunring 504 Gateway timeout. To make
> matters worse, the problem won't remedy itself, full restart (cherokee +
> php-cgi) is required to fix it. Now, I don't know the cause of the problem,
> it might be even in kernel (some race condition in socket code under high
> load), php-cgi mechanism or the way cherokee communicates with it...
>
> What I do know is that using TCP/IP sockets for the communication (e.g.
> 127.0.0.1:9000, instead of /tmp/cherokee-php.socket) makes it much more
> robust. And before anyone says that using TCP/IP is slower, I don't think
> so, couldn't find any difference in speed, although I didn't measure it
> extensively. It seems that localhost TCP/IP transport on Linux is heavily
> optimized. But, my primary concern at this time is robustness.
>
> Anybody having gateway problems, try switching to TCP/IP communication, you
> might be pleasantly surprised.
> --
> http://www.linuxinsight.com/
>


-- 
Yo'av Moshe
_______________________________________________
Cherokee mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.octality.com/listinfo/cherokee

Reply via email to