"Poul-Henning Kamp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Do notice, that if you have a high hit ratio under high traffic,
> adding more thread pools is recommended to lower the mutex
> congestion.
This is as good an occasion as any to mention that these parameters are
poorly named; thread_pool_{min,max}
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Mich
ael S. Fischer" writes:
>Funny you should ask, I've been spending a lot of time with Varnish in
>the lab. Here are a few observations I've made:
>- When the cache hit ratio is very high (i.e. 100%), we discovered
>that Varnish's default configuration of thre
On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 1:53 AM, Henning Stener <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Are you sending one request per connection and closing it, or are you
> serving a number of requests to 10K different connections? In the last
> case how many requests/sec are you seeing?
In our test, we sent about 20
Are you sending one request per connection and closing it, or are you
serving a number of requests to 10K different connections? In the last
case how many requests/sec are you seeing?
I have ran a small test against 1.1.2 release on a 8-cpu (dual
quad-core) system with 4GB RAM running Debian etch
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 9:52 PM, Mark Smallcombe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What tuning recommendations do you have for varnish to help it handle high
> load?
Funny you should ask, I've been spending a lot of time with Varnish in
the lab. Here are a few observations I've made:
(N.B. We're
We are running varnish (default config) in production and are tuning
it to handle high load.
We have 4 load balanced varnish servers (64 bit RedHat 5.1, 4G of RAM,
everything on a gigabit network). We find that under high load varnish
is unable to serve pages or the keepalive pages to our load bal
