> > Hello all, THis is a bit off topic, but sure this is a good place to
> > ask this question.
>
> Yeah. We have nothing better to do anyway, iptables is already perfect!
>
> > I'm sitting here getting frustrated on how to get my http
> > server tuned for a large connection load.
> >
> > I have a server performace problems after about 50 TIME_WAITs show up in
> > my connection table.
> >
> > My question is what's significant about 50?
>
> Probably nothing. You most likely have a general performance problem
> with the server you are using, and the 50 TIME_WAITs are just a coincidence.
>
> In general, if you have 'N' TIME_WAIT connections, given 60 seconds for
> the normal TIME_WAIT state, you have 60/N connections per second. This
> is about the only sensible thing counting TIME_WAITs can tell you.
>
> So don't waste your time with them: look at your application, and where
> it spends its time waiting / why it does not handle new connections.
> The best tool for this is understanding the application. The second
> best tool is strace.

I've tested an profiled my application and it is spending most of it's
time in accept. I just don't understand it. I will serve up to 50
connections perfectly and then it will hang for a few seconds, sitting in
accept, and then serve 3 requests, then hang for a few seconds in
accept, then serve 3 request, then hang ...

Here is the strace for the socket bind and listen...

socket(PF_INET, SOCK_STREAM, IPPROTO_IP) = 3
rt_sigaction(SIGPIPE, {SIG_IGN}, {SIG_IGN}, 8) = 0
setsockopt(3, SOL_SOCKET, SO_REUSEADDR, [1], 4) = 0
bind(3, {sin_family=AF_INET, sin_port=htons(8000),
sin_addr=inet_addr("0.0.0.0")}}, 16) = 0
listen(3, 50)                          = 0
accept(3,

Then a request...

{sin_family=AF_INET, sin_port=htons(35186),
sin_addr=inet_addr("127.0.0.1")}}, [16]) = 4
socket(PF_UNIX, SOCK_STREAM, 0)         = 7
connect(7, {sin_family=AF_UNIX, path="/var/run/.nscd_socket"}, 110) = -1
ENOENT (No such file or directory)
shutdown(4, 1 /* send */)               = 0
accept(3,


Anyone see anything strange here?


Reply via email to