Hi Sage, Is there any timeline around the switch? So that we can plan ahead for the testing. We are running apache + mod-fastcgi in production at scale (540 OSDs, 9 RGW hosts) and it looks good so far. Although at the beginning we came across a problem with large volume of 500 error, which tracked to that mod-fastcgi is using "select" which limits to 1024 FDs. We used "poll" to replace "select" and the problem was solved. Thanks, Guang ---------------------------------------- > Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 11:31:54 -0800 > From: sweil@xxxxxxxxxx > To: ceph-users@xxxxxxxx; ceph-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: [ceph-users] who is using radosgw with civetweb? > > Hey, > > We are considering switching to civetweb (the embedded/standalone rgw web > server) as the primary supported RGW frontend instead of the current > apache + mod-fastcgi or mod-proxy-fcgi approach. "Supported" here means > both the primary platform the upstream development focuses on and what the > downstream Red Hat product will officially support. > > How many people are using RGW standalone using the embedded civetweb > server instead of apache? In production? At what scale? What > version(s) (civetweb first appeared in firefly and we've backported most > fixes). > > Have you seen any problems? Any other feedback? The hope is to (vastly) > simplify deployment. > > Thanks! > sage > _______________________________________________ > ceph-users mailing list > ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com ?韬{.n?????%??檩??w?{.n????u朕?Ф?塄}?财??j:+v?? ? ???2??璀??摺?囤??z夸z罐?+?????w棹f
