Hi all,
I activated last week the TTrace package on my production server.
I stopped it after a few days. It is working great and is really terrific to
keep AOLServer process memory low !
BUT... with the same traffic as before my processor (%CPU and load balancing)
is multiplied by about 8 !
Jean-Fabrice RABAUTE said:
time { array get t d10906c3dac1172d4f60bd41f224ae75 } 100
You shouldn't use array get to get one value. the pattern isn't a key,
it is what is says it is: a pattern. So foo*, a?c and [a-z] are all
allowed and array get will return you a list of key/value pairs that
Selon Bas Scheffers [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Jean-Fabrice RABAUTE said:
time { array get t d10906c3dac1172d4f60bd41f224ae75 } 100
You shouldn't use array get to get one value. the pattern isn't a key,
it is what is says it is: a pattern. So foo*, a?c and [a-z] are all
allowed and array get will
Selon Zoran Vasiljevic [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Tuesday 24 February 2004 12:02, you wrote:
BUT... with the same traffic as before my processor (%CPU and load
balancing) is multiplied by about 8 !
After few searches, I realised a nsv lock contention was very high
(checked
in
On Tuesday 24 February 2004 12:02, you wrote:
BUT... with the same traffic as before my processor (%CPU and load
balancing) is multiplied by about 8 !
After few searches, I realised a nsv lock contention was very high (checked
in nstelemetry.adp).
So it is not directly the TTrace package
On Tuesday 24 February 2004 13:24, you wrote:
I agree 100% with you. Thread should gradually load all the procs.
I may have something wrong somewhere or a special thing in all my tcl
procs, I will check that and let you know.
Pay attention to ns_eval! This can be your bottleneck.
On each
On Tuesday 24 February 2004 13:24, you wrote:
I agree 100% with you. Thread should gradually load all the procs.
I may have something wrong somewhere or a special thing in all my tcl
procs, I will check that and let you know.
You can make your life easier by adding some log displays to
the
Selon Zoran Vasiljevic [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Tuesday 24 February 2004 13:24, you wrote:
I agree 100% with you. Thread should gradually load all the procs.
I may have something wrong somewhere or a special thing in all my tcl
procs, I will check that and let you know.
You can make your
One of the Solaris 9 build problems is mine. It's been a while since I built it, but
the problem as I recall is it finds a mach-o/dyld.h include file and decides to use
the Max OS X shared lib functions. Currently I don't have a solaris 9 machine so I
cannot try and build it.
Deleting the
We have a client who wants to have files written by AOLserver to have
perms 664 instead of 644. We've tried various permutations of setting
umasks, but nothing seems to help. We're using nsd 3.3 (the Arsdigita
version).
Files are written to by the application in three different ways:
# create a
This won't solve the problem of the files being created with the wrong
permissions, but a quick fix may be to call ns_chmod after the file has
been written.
See
http://aolserver.sourceforge.net/docs/devel/tcl/api/file.html#ns_chmod
Ross
On Tue, 2004-02-24 at 12:48, Janine Sisk wrote:
We
On Tue, 2004-02-24 at 11:48, Janine Sisk wrote:
We have a client who wants to have files written by AOLserver to have
perms 664 instead of 644. We've tried various permutations of setting
umasks, but nothing seems to help. We're using nsd 3.3 (the Arsdigita
version).
Files are written to
On 2004.02.24, Janine Sisk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So what you guys are telling me is that there's no way to make
AOLserver do this automagically, that the application code has to be
modified?
The client insists it was working this way when they were hosted
elsewhere, but I think they must
We're using daemontools. I've put the umask command in the run script
but it didn't help.
janine
On Feb 24, 2004, at 4:33 PM, Dossy wrote:
On 2004.02.24, Janine Sisk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So what you guys are telling me is that there's no way to make
AOLserver do this automagically, that the
On Tue, 24 Feb 2004, Janine Sisk wrote:
We're using daemontools. I've put the umask command in the run script
but it didn't help.
Is it possible that the umask command is not being executed in the process
that's the parent of nsd? For example, if the umask command is executed
in a separate
We're using AOLServer 4.0 and recently the web-based Locks report showed
contention for a lock named mu464 (5.9%). We have also seen contention for
a lock named ns:cs:2.
Do you folks have any recommendations for finding the details of the purpose
of each of these locks and where they are being
16 matches
Mail list logo
