On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 4:18 PM, P J <pauljflists@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:This is unlikely to have a major effect on your issue, as I believe
> On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 5:28 AM, Jim Jagielski <jim@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> The closer MinSpareServers/MaxSpareServers are, the more time
>> Apache needs to spend killing and creating child processes
>> to ensure it stays within that narrow limit
>> On May 3, 2012, at 2:40 PM, P J wrote:
>>
>
> Thanks. Yes, I understand that. I set them both to that number to try and
> induce the issue we've been seeing.
> If I set:
>
> MinSpareServers 1024
> MaxSpareServers 2048
>
> 1000+ simultaneous connections is not uncommon this server.
>
something strange is going on when you reach 1024 processes, but why
do you have MinSpareServers so high?
If you start 1024 children initially, and then 900 of them are busy,
you are asking httpd to ensure there are at least 1924 children. It
seems massive overkill to ensure that there are so many idle
processes.
If your high water mark is (say) 1536 clients, and you start 1024
processes, then I would go with settings like this:
MinSpareServers 128
MaxSpareServers 1536
StartServers 1024
MaxClients 2048
ServerLimit 2048
So, you start with 1024 processes, increasing up to a maximum of 2048
processes. If there are ever more than 1536 processes idle, kill some
off.
Cheers
Tom
|