In response to Hannes Dorbath <light@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > > On 24.08.2007 02:43, Bill Moran wrote: > >> Hannes Dorbath <light@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> Bill Moran wrote: > >>>> I guess I just feel that "broken" is a bit of a harsh term. If > >>>> your expectations are for full-blown connection management from > >>>> pconnect(), then you will be disappointed. If you take it for > >>>> what it is: persistent connections, then those limitations would > >>>> be expected. > >>> It's broken because persistent connections get randomly garbage > >>> collected where they should not. So broken in the sense of bugged. > >>> Expect connections to die for no reason, especially under load. > >> > >> It's funny that you should mention that, since I haven't seen that > >> behaviour in 18 months of load testing over a dozen servers. > > Please reply to the list as well. Your reply to me did not have the list in the CC. > How did you verify that? It will spawn a new connection silently, if the > old got dropped. Did you really verify your logs, that you don't get > more new connections than Apache spawns workers? This might not be > noticeable for you, if you are running Apache. In a FCGI environment > where you have a fixed amount of workers, you notice new connections, as > there should not be any. As I stated in the other reply to an email that looked similar to this one -- I'm not sure I understand the behaviour you're trying to describe. -- Bill Moran http://www.potentialtech.com ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
