Hi Ivan and Dan (and the lists),

>The size of apache processes is telling me you're using PHP or some other heavy apache module.

Indeed I am (I forgot to mention this). It is PHP 4.4.6, and it is set up as an Apache module.

> If so, you can switch to using PHP as FastCGI responder via mod_fcgid. The benefits are that you'll get only a few number of > large php-cgi processes (configurable, usually around 10), and the rest will be lighter httpd processes for serving static
> content.

Will that not have some other downsides? I remember that previously when running PHP on the CGI, that e.g. a lot of debugging power got lost, as each and every error would simply either return a blank page, or simply an "internal servor error 500" or so.... Is that also the case with FastCGI?

>BUT, if something else changed when you switched to the new apache (e.g. PHP version, your web applications), it may not be
>apache's fault.

The PHP version got upgraded from 4.4.0 to 4.4.6 too, but none of the actual application scripts changed.

BTW: At times what one sees happening is that 2 of the httpd daemons quickly go up to (each, or in turn) about 50% (or 70% if it can grab that much), then stays quite a while at that, and then goes back to a more reasonable amount. At other times, there are around 10+ httpd processes that each consume around 5% of the CPU, with a lot more of them using around 0-1% of the CPU (perhaps defunct already?). Dunno. Apache + PHP is lightning fast, but... at the expense of the CPU being pulled close to 100% all to easily...

Then, regarding Dan's sendmail configuration suggestion: tnx! I just put that in place and will monitor sendmail's behaviour today, to see how it performs during heavy server load.

I'll let you guys know how I get on with this...

Meanwhile: I'm still open for suggestions as to how to best make Apache behave less selfishly.

freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Reply via email to