On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 12:03:59PM -0700, John Watson wrote:
> Well doesn't make sense when theres >4 concurrent requests
> At any given time there's around 12 active_connections, but sock-3 is
> still never being used
Can you see a difference with only one worker process?
Currently, different workers have distinct counters of active connections.
It should be unnoticed under a high load.
> On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 9:34 AM, John Watson <[1]j...@disqus.com> wrote:
>
> Ohhhh... that makes complete sense now.
> Had 4 workers.
> Thanks!
>
> On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 4:47 AM, Ruslan Ermilov <[2]r...@nginx.com>
> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 01:45:14AM -0700, John Watson wrote:
> > Was investigating some issues today when we noticed that
> least_conn wasn't
> > behaving as expected.
> > upstream backend {
> > least_conn;
> > server unix:/tmp/sock-1.sock;
> > server unix:/tmp/sock-2.sock;
> > server unix:/tmp/sock-3.sock;
> > }
> > The expected behavior for 4 simultaneous requests it should
> distribute
> > them:
> > sock-1: 2
> > sock-2: 1
> > sock-3: 1
> > However, what we're seeing is:
> > sock-1: 3
> > sock-2: 1
> > sock-3: 0
> > Which coincidentally lines up with the number of requests a
> socket can
> > service simultaneously.
> > This is using 1.2.7
>
> And the number of configured worker processes is?
_______________________________________________
nginx mailing list
nginx@nginx.org
http://mailman.nginx.org/mailman/listinfo/nginx
