On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 12:27 AM, Henrik Schröder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 8:01 PM, Jeff Rodenburg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > >> Henrik - can you elaborate on what you've found with this? I'm not >> looking to resolve the issues, just trying to get a better picture of where >> the bodies are buried, and to convince an all-windows shop that it's OK to >> run a few linux instances to support certain application services. >> > > On our current project, we run memcached on two servers that are also web > servers, and on both machines the memcached process consumes exactly 25% > CPU. The weird thing is that those two servers have different hardware. One > is a two-processor dual core Xeon at 2,5GHz, and the other is a > two-processor dual core Xeon at 1,6GHz. The first one runs Windows Server > 2008, the other Windows Server 2003. But the memcached process on each takes > up exactly 25% CPU all the time. I can also see on the stats that the second > server gets more memcached traffic than the first one, so the second server > is slower than the first and gets more traffic, but the CPU use is 25% on > both servers. > Ok, thanks to Brodie Thiesfield who managed to produce working Visual Studio projects of Libevent 1.4.4 and Memcached 1.2.5, I've compiled my own version. I took his project, added the old memcached icon (These things are important! :) ), fixed a file version number, and compiled everything in my Visual Studio 2005 with whatever optimizations it can do, and finally got to deploy this version live. It's been running for a day now, and so far it looks good, still at 0% CPU utilization so hopefully whatever problems the older windows versions of memcached had are gone. I'll let it run for a week, and if it's still behaving after that time, I'll try to make available our binary for those that are interested. /Henrik Schröder
