Jake wrote at 2006-1-31 15:53 -0500: >Am I gleaming from that that you are proposing a less-is-more approach to >threads?
That's something proposed several times in the list. In our installation, we used the default (4 threads) for a long time -- until we met overload situations (all 4 threads in use over long periods of time) when we switched to 6 threads. However, in our situation not only Zope handles the application. Beside that there are backend resources such as various databases that can work concurrently with Zope. Therefore, our application is not CPU bound (at least not on the host, Zope runs on) and increasing the number of threads can increase throughput. > ... >This seems to eat up about half of the RAM on the server. > >Would one thread but double the cache size do better? You have read my message to the end (and Florent's comment)? If you have a single thread, then a single long running request would exclude all other (maybe very short) requests until it finisches. I am convinced that you want some degree of concurrency to favour short running requests. 4 threads is not too a default. -- Dieter _______________________________________________ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )