----- Original Message ----- From: "Simon Clewer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Stas Bekman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, January 09, 2004 11:11 AM Subject: Re: ithreads with modperl
> In our case Stas is right, there's plenty of processor resources - even > though the final request takes up to 3 minutes it only uses a few seconds > ( less perhaps ? ) of processor . > > Mostly it's just waiting for replies from remote servers - parsing responses > and generating requests takes very little processing ( in fact I'm surprised > at how little ). > > If processor resources was an issue we wouldn't be using perl at all :-). > > Simon > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Stas Bekman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Perrin Harkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: "Simon Clewer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Friday, January 09, 2004 9:14 AM > Subject: Re: ithreads with modperl > > > > Perrin Harkins wrote: > > > On Thu, 2004-01-08 at 20:22, Simon Clewer wrote: > > > > > >>Huge memory usage ... each ithread uses about 10M of ram ( image of > Apache, > > >>image of mod perl and image of our deep-link robot ), and as we use 5 > > >>ithreads plus the original thread that means that each Apache is using > 60 M > > >>and because we trade on being the best and the fastest at what we do we > need > > >>to keep plenty of Apaches ready and waiting ( about 20 ) - so we're > using > > >>heaps of memory. > > > > > > > > > My question would be, why are you using Perl threads for this? The talk > > > about the 5.8 threads sounds pretty bad, both for memory and > > > performance. I can't imagine ithreads were a whole lot better on either > > > front. I think you'd be better off forking. > > > > Ah, sorry for chiming in again, it's true regarding the memory, but not > that > > bad regarding performance. The only real performance overhead is to spawn > a > > new perl interpreter (which is just terrible if you have many modules > > preloaded), which you can prespawn. Once it's spawned the run-time > performance > > should be a bit worse than a normal perl, bad not as bad as you made it > sound > > ;) On the other hand you get different benefits from using threads, and > > depending on your application your overall performance could be even > better > > using threads. Of course if you are on windows, you have no choice but to > use > > threads. > > > > __________________________________________________________________ > > Stas Bekman JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker > > http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org > > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com > > http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com > > > > > > -- > > Reporting bugs: http://perl.apache.org/bugs/ > > Mail list info: http://perl.apache.org/maillist/modperl.html > > > > > -- Reporting bugs: http://perl.apache.org/bugs/ Mail list info: http://perl.apache.org/maillist/modperl.html
