On Mon, 7 Mar 2005 08:35:12 -0800, Aaron Bannert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Mar 4, 2005, at 12:08 PM, Jeff Trawick wrote: > > Any comments on these two separate proposals? > > > > b) tweak worker MPM to automatically bump the value of MaxSpareThreads > > to at least 15% of MaxClients, with a warning written to the error log > > I like this best, because is requires no action on the user's part > to take advantage of the change.
same here > Just so I understand the problem correctly, you're saying that > when Worker is trying hard to stay near that MaxSpareThreads > setting, and under a condition that pushes the server constantly > up near that threshold (eg. when you have a sustained connection > rate that is higher than MaxSpareThreads) then the turnover of > connections causes Worker to kill and respawn children quickly, > but that since the turnover is so quick you end up having children > lingering around with one or two thread slots and essentially > we approach the prefork scenario in terms of number of child > processes. Is this correct? yes, that is correct... the more lengthy the response time, the worse the problem gets Thanks for your comments.
