atom feed20 messages in ru.sysoev.nginxRe: AJP Support
FromSent OnAttachments
Stephen Nelson-SmithJun 23, 2008 2:33 am 
Manlio PerilloJun 23, 2008 3:32 am 
Igor SysoevJun 23, 2008 12:42 pm 
Stephen Nelson-SmithJun 23, 2008 11:54 pm 
Igor SysoevJun 23, 2008 11:59 pm 
Stephen Nelson-SmithJun 24, 2008 12:11 am 
Igor SysoevJun 24, 2008 12:22 am 
mikeJun 24, 2008 12:26 am 
Stephen Nelson-SmithJun 24, 2008 3:45 am 
Henrik VendelboJun 24, 2008 4:02 am 
Igor SysoevJun 24, 2008 4:03 am 
Stephen Nelson-SmithJun 24, 2008 4:16 am 
Igor SysoevJun 24, 2008 5:23 am 
Phillip B OldhamJun 24, 2008 5:46 am 
Paul DekkersJun 24, 2008 5:51 am 
Stephen Nelson-SmithJun 24, 2008 9:56 am 
Stephen Nelson-SmithJun 24, 2008 11:31 pm 
Dan MJun 25, 2008 12:52 pm 
Cliff WellsJun 26, 2008 11:40 am 
Igor SysoevJun 26, 2008 12:20 pm 
Subject:Re: AJP Support
From:Igor Sysoev (is-G@public.gmane.org)
Date:Jun 24, 2008 5:23:51 am
List:ru.sysoev.nginx

On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 12:17:00PM +0100, Stephen Nelson-Smith wrote:

Igor Sysoev wrote:

In terms of handing off http connections, does nginx benefit most from plenty of RAM or again, is the guideline to go for a proliferation of cores?

If you will use nginx as proxy only, then you do not need plenty of RAM. If yor use it for static files, then RAM may be used for OS VM cache.

Right. In this case I will not be serving any content, only terminating SSL connections and passing off http requests to a pool of tomcat servers.

So I could go with eg 2G RAM and spend the rest of the money of faster quad core chips.

Yes, 2G is more than enough.

Incidentally, can.worms.open(at the moment, what's to choose between the Intel quad cores and the AMDs?)

Our procurement is always through Dell, so it's a fairly simple set of choices.

I do not know which modern CPUs are better now.

-- Igor Sysoev http://sysoev.ru/en/