On 29 Oct 2008, at 15:29, Maurício Linhares wrote:
> > A slow SQL query woudn't freeze rails 2.2 as it freezes 2.1 now as the > MRI removes threads that are waiting for IO handles to be available > from the running list, so this should not be a big issue with the new It depends. C extensions can freeze the entire ruby interpreter, right now the native mysql driver is one of those (but see the work the neverblock guys have been doing). I don't recall what other database drivers do. Fred > rails, but JRuby is a definitely better option today with the latest > rails. > > - > Maurício Linhares > http://alinhavado.wordpress.com/ (pt-br) | http:// > blog.codevader.com/ (en) > João Pessoa, PB, +55 83 8867-7208 > > > > On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 12:26 PM, michael_teter <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > wrote: >> >> I don't know how practical this is, but I can envision a system >> whereby each process wraps a request/response with a Start End >> message >> to a load balancer so it will know which processes are busy and which >> are not. Further, the load balancer could keep statistics that might >> be useful in optimizing the balance behavior. >> >>> Yup that's the way it is. load balancing across several mongrels >>> helps >>> a bit, but not massively because most load balancers just spread the >>> load equally - they don't prioritize mongrels that aren't >>> processing a >>> request. >>> Rails 2.2 is thread safe, but MRI's less than stellar threading >>> means >>> that won't make a lot of difference if you are using MRI. For jruby >>> things could get very interesting. >>> >>> Fred >>> >>>> Secondly, for what it's worth, I'm running a mongrel cluster, but >>>> that >>>> isn't helping right now. >>> >>>> More info: >>> >>>> "top" shows the host machine completely idle. >>>> development.log shows only user A's query SQL, but it does not show >>>> user B's request for a new page. >>>> When user A's query finally completes, then suddenly Rails comes >>>> back >>>> to life, and user B gets a response. >>> >>>> This is a serious problem for me right now. It must be a >>>> configuration problem, because there's no way Rails is designed to >>>> behave this way...? >>> >>>> Oh also, the database is hosted on another machine, and it's >>>> Oracle 9. >>> >>>> Thanks! >>>> Michael >>> >> > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
