On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 11:25 AM, Willy Tarreau <w#1wt.eu> wrote:
>> Why on the same port? We currently run 15 Mongrel processes on each
>> box. Concurrency is not a problem.
> yes it is, because at one moment you have to choose exactly one of them.
> Both checks and traffic share the same access. Having them on the same
> port will let them choose. The first one ready to take a connection
> would take it, whether it is a health-check or regular traffic would not
> matter. Also, you could reduce the number of independant instances, thus
> reduce the number of checks. For instance, having 4 sets of 4 processes
> would really make sense.
I didn't realize you were talking about health checks. All right, but we only check backends every 60 seconds precisely because of this problem.
I'm sure it's possible to run multiple Mongrel processes on the same port, but I'm not keen to experiment. I would rather just waiting for a fork-friendly, thread-safe version of Rails to go with a stable, OS-threaded, stable version of Ruby 1.9. :-)
Alexander. Received on 2008/09/16 12:07
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : 2008/09/16 12:15 CEST