On Aug 17, 2012, at 6:17 PM, Matt Aimonetti <[email protected]> wrote:
> you might want to run that from within EC2 to avoid network latency, then you > might want to increase the concurrency (I believe you are currently only > sending 1 request at a time). I misunderstood the httperf manual. I thought I had a concurrency of 10. That would explain why it didn't make much difference which server, used. They were only processing 1 request a the time. I'll give it another try and post back. > Finally, if your code is waiting on IO for 45ms per request, this is where > your bottleneck is, not in the web server. > If that's the case, you want to try to increase the concurrency to see when > you hit the maximum amount of requests per processes available. > Thin is single threaded and blocking, so if your response if slow because of > a DB call for instance, 1.9 + Puma should give you a better throughput. > Unicorn should also be able to fork more processes to handle the load > (depending on your settings and the available resources), Rainbows is also an > alternative web server based on unicorn and meant for slower response times. Thanks. I'll look into rainbows as well. I also heard some news about Goliath. > (it looks like, if you are really hitting your server, 50ms from your home > connection is quite a good response time tho) :) It is the homepage. I am caching the views, and made sure the caches were warm before running the test. -- Ylan -- SD Ruby mailing list [email protected] http://groups.google.com/group/sdruby
