At 08:40 AM 8/14/2002, you wrote:
>I am running a website which generates around 100,000 pageviews a day and I
>am wondering if I stop using persistent conections to the MySQL database and
>use
>normal open and close conections this would reduce the load onto my server?
>
>Most conections are eith
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 11:26 AM
To: Tod Harter; Thomas Seifert; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Persisten Connections
At 11:14 -0400 8/14/02, Tod Harter wrote:
>On Wednesday 14 August 2002 09:54 am, Thomas Seifert wrote:
>
>I disagree entirely
>
>Persisten
sh I like to catch.
-Original Message-
From: mos [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, August 16, 2002 10:36 AM
To: John Wards
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Persisten Connections
At 08:40 AM 8/14/2002, you wrote:
>I am running a website which generates around 100,000 pageviews a da
At 08:40 AM 8/14/2002, you wrote:
>I am running a website which generates around 100,000 pageviews a day and I
>am wondering if I stop using persistent conections to the MySQL database and
>use
>normal open and close conections this would reduce the load onto my server?
>
>Most conections are eith
Hi,
- Original Message -
From: "Thomas Seifert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Tod Harter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 10:19 PM
Subject: Re: Persisten Connections
> And I disagree with this view.
>
, but no overhead due to opening / closing the db).
- Original Message -
From: "StreetWarz & SpeedWarz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Thomas Seifert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 9:48 PM
Subject: Re: Persis
Wednesday, August 14, 2002 12:19 PM
Subject: Re: Persisten Connections
> And I disagree with this view.
>
> If you've got a server with 512 MB RAM and running the webserver and the
> db-server on the same machine, 100 idling mysql-processes are a HUGE
overhead.
> At most if not every
uot; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 9:19 PM
Subject: Re: Persisten Connections
> And I disagree with this view.
>
> If you've got a server with 512 MB RAM and running the webserver and the
> db-server on the same machine, 100 i
Thomas,
1. Yes different servers for webserver and database
is the key. They have competing priorities.
2. The 100kb estimate is db-dependent, no?
P.
> And I disagree with this view.
>
> If you've got a server with 512 MB RAM and running the webserver and the
> db-server on t
And I disagree with this view.
If you've got a server with 512 MB RAM and running the webserver and the
db-server on the same machine, 100 idling mysql-processes are a HUGE overhead.
At most if not every http-request requires a mysql-connection.
I did many benchmarks and I got a huge decrease of
ROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 7:25 PM
Subject: Re: Persisten Connections
> At 11:14 -0400 8/14/02, Tod Harter wrote:
> >On Wednesday 14 August 2002 09:54 am, Thomas Seifert wrote:
> >
> >I disagree entirely
> >
> >Persistent connections have li
At 11:14 -0400 8/14/02, Tod Harter wrote:
>On Wednesday 14 August 2002 09:54 am, Thomas Seifert wrote:
>
>I disagree entirely
>
>Persistent connections have little or nothing to do with increasing load!
>
>Given that you mention you are using PHP I'll assume you have mod_php running
>in Apache
On Wednesday 14 August 2002 09:54 am, Thomas Seifert wrote:
I disagree entirely
Persistent connections have little or nothing to do with increasing load!
Given that you mention you are using PHP I'll assume you have mod_php running
in Apache. Each Apache child process in this configuration
it will reduce the load for sure!
MySQL is very fast in opening and closing connections at least if the database-server
and webserver are on the same machine.
I don't know how it will perform on different machines.
Thomas
On Wed, 14 Aug 2002 14:40:31 +0100
"John Wards" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
14 matches
Mail list logo
