On Sun, Feb 4, 2018 at 8:27 PM, Luca Toscano <toscano.luca@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Hajo, > > > 2018-02-01 3:58 GMT+01:00 Luca Toscano <toscano.luca@xxxxxxxxx>: >> >> Hi Hajo, >> >> 2018-01-31 2:37 GMT-08:00 Hajo Locke <Hajo.Locke@xxxxxx>: >>> >>> Hello, >>> >>> >>> Am 22.01.2018 um 11:54 schrieb Hajo Locke: >>> >>> Hello, >>> >>> Am 19.01.2018 um 15:48 schrieb Luca Toscano: >>> >>> Hi Hajo, >>> >>> 2018-01-19 13:23 GMT+01:00 Hajo Locke <Hajo.Locke@xxxxxx>: >>>> >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> thanks Daniel and Stefan. This is a good point. >>>> I did the test with a static file and this test was successfully done >>>> within only a few seconds. >>>> >>>> finished in 20.06s, 4984.80 req/s, 1.27GB/s >>>> requests: 100000 total, 100000 started, 100000 done, 100000 succeeded, 0 >>>> failed, 0 errored, 0 timeout >>>> >>>> so problem seems to be not h2load and basic apache. may be i should look >>>> deeper into proxy_fcgi configuration. >>>> php-fpm configuration is unchanged and was successfully used with >>>> classical fastcgi-benchmark, so i think i have to doublecheck the proxy. >>>> >>>> now i did this change in proxy: >>>> >>>> from >>>> enablereuse=on >>>> to >>>> enablereuse=off >>>> >>>> this change leads to a working h2load testrun: >>>> finished in 51.74s, 1932.87 req/s, 216.05MB/s >>>> requests: 100000 total, 100000 started, 100000 done, 100000 succeeded, 0 >>>> failed, 0 errored, 0 timeout >>>> >>>> iam surprised by that. i expected a higher performance when reusing >>>> backend connections rather then creating new ones. >>>> I did some further tests and changed some other php-fpm/proxy values, >>>> but once "enablereuse=on" is set, the problem returns. >>>> >>>> Should i just run the proxy with enablereuse=off? Or do you have an >>>> other suspicion? >>> >>> >>> >>> Before giving up I'd check two things: >>> >>> 1) That the same results happen with a regular localhost socket rather >>> than a unix one. >>> >>> I changed my setup to use tcp-sockets in php-fpm and proxy-fcgi. >>> Currently i see the same behaviour. >>> >>> 2) What changes on the php-fpm side. Are there more busy workers when >>> enablereuse is set to on? I am wondering how php-fpm handles FCGI requests >>> happening on the same socket, as opposed to assuming that 1 connection == 1 >>> FCGI request. >>> >>> If "enablereuse=off" is set i see a lot of running php-workerprocesses >>> (120-130) and high load. Behaviour is like expected. >>> When set "enablereuse=on" i can see a big change. number of running >>> php-workers is really low (~40). The test is running some time and then it >>> stucks. >>> I can see that php-fpm processes are still active and waiting for >>> connections, but proxy_fcgi is not using them nor it is establishing new >>> connections. loadavg is low and benchmarktest is not able to finalize. >>> >>> I did some further tests to solve this issue. I set ttl=1 for this Proxy >>> and achieved good performance and high number of working childs. But this is >>> paradoxical. >>> proxy_fcgi knows about inactive connection to kill it, but not reenable >>> this connection for working. >>> May be this is helpful to others. >>> >>> May be a kind of communicationproblem and checking health/busy status of >>> php-processes. >>> Whole proxy configuration is this: >>> >>> <Proxy "unix:/dev/shm/php70fpm.sock|fcgi://php70fpm"> >>> ProxySet enablereuse=off flushpackets=On timeout=3600 max=15000 >>> </Proxy> >>> <FilesMatch \.php$|\.php70$> >>> SetHandler "proxy:fcgi://php70fpm" >>> </FilesMatch> >> >> >> Thanks a lot for following up and reporting these interesting results! >> Yann opened a thread[1] on dev@ to discuss the issue, let's follow up in >> there so we don't keep two conversations open. >> >> Luca >> >> [1]: >> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/a9586dab96979bf45550c9714b36c49aa73526183998c5354ca9f1c8@%3Cdev.httpd.apache.org%3E >> > > reporting in here what I think it is happening in your test environment when > enablereuse is set to on. Recap of your settings: > > /etc/apache2/conf.d/limits.conf > StartServers 10 > MaxClients 500 > MinSpareThreads 450 > MaxSpareThreads 500 > ThreadsPerChild 150 > MaxRequestsPerChild 0 > Serverlimit 500 > > <Proxy "unix:/dev/shm/php70fpm.sock|fcgi://php70fpm/"> > ProxySet enablereuse=on flushpackets=On timeout=3600 max=1500 > </Proxy> > <FilesMatch \.php$|\.php70$> > SetHandler "proxy:fcgi://php70fpm/" > </FilesMatch> > > request_terminate_timeout = 7200 > listen = /dev/shm/php70fpm.sock > pm = ondemand > pm.max_children = 500 > pm.max_requests = 2000 > > By default mod_proxy allows a connection pool of ThreadsPerChild connections > to the backend for each httpd process, meanwhile in your case you have set > 3200 using the 'max' parameter (as stated in the docs it is a per process > setting, not a overall one). PHP-FPM handles one connection for each worker > at the time, and your settings allow a maximum of 500 processes, therefore a > maximum of 500 connections established at the same time from httpd. When > connection reuse is set to on, the side effect is that for each mod_proxy's > open/established connection in the pool there will be one PHP-FPM worker > tight to it, even if not serving any request (waiting for one basically). We should definitely spell out the impact of enablereuse on php-fpm specifically. I think one thing that is missing in the above recap is that w/o H2 given MaxClients=500, the impact is probably nil because there are simply not enough server threads to max out the pool and still try to make new connections. With H2, you have N additional h2 worker threads per process, so it puts it as out of balance as if MaxClients were larger but pm.max_children were not. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|