On 1/20/08 10:44 AM, "Graham Leggett" <minf...@sharp.fm> wrote:
In terms of space, caches are not infinite in size, but then neither are
the majority of backend websites either.
73GB is pretty big for a reverse proxy cache. And fast SAS drives are
pretty cheap.
Sure, but I think the point that Brian was making was that you could
support the kind of large load sizes that are traditionally associated
with event based models using a prefork or worker setup, simply by
making sure you have enough RAM.
And to stimulate some conversation. I just don't want us to "buy into" the
"async is better" because that's the "trend" in servers nowadays. If async
truly is better, then let's us it. Just don't want to do it "just because
everyone else is."
Also, this test included all sorts of clients (slow, fast, in between). A
blocking thread didn't seem to hurt the server. I'm guessing that 48k
blocking threads wouldn't hurt it too bad either.
Also, I'm going to look at the serf "buckets" when I get time. Story of my
life, though, no time...
21 messages in org.apache.httpd.devRe: Is async the answer
