# A question of fastcgi\_pass method **URL:** \ **Category:** NGINX\ **Created:** [October 17, 2010, 12:44pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/a-question-of-fastcgi-pass-method/197615 "2010-10-17T12:44:06Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 3\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Dobai-Pataky\_BSSSSl](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/d/77aa72/32.png) [@Dobai-Pataky\_BSSSSl](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Dobai-Pataky_BSSSSl)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2010, 12:44pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/a-question-of-fastcgi-pass-method/197615/1 "2010-10-17T12:44:06Z")
HI, I’m a chinese ,sorry for my poor english. I’m new to nginx. I have installed nginx 0.7.67 ,and installed flup ,web.py to use python . I writer a simple test.py file ,and just run : python test.py . VIsit [http://ip:8080](http://ip:8080) and it works well. That means the web.py is right installed. So, I try to use nginx with this python file. I edit the nginx.conf like this: ``` fastcgi_pass 127.0.0.1:9000; fastcgi_param SERVER_NAME $server_name; fastcgi_param SERVER_PORT $server_port; fastcgi_param SERVER_ADDR $server_addr; fastcgi_param REMOTE_ADDR $remote_addr; fastcgi_param REMOTE_PORT $remote_port; fastcgi_param SERVER_PROTOCOL $server_protocol; fastcgi_param PATH_INFO $fastcgi_script_name; fastcgi_param REQUEST_METHOD $request_method; fastcgi_param QUERY_STRING $query_string; fastcgi_param CONTENT_TYPE $content_type; fastcgi_param CONTENT_LENGTH $content_length; ``` and use spawn-fcgi to start up the python file : ``` spawn-fcgi -f FILE -a 127.0.0.1 -p 9000 ``` then visit the address [http://ip](http://ip) it works ,shows the result what I wanted . and then I simply change the fastcgi\_pass method TCP to UNIX SOCKET nginx.conf : fastcgi\_pass unix:/tmp/nginx.socket spawn-fcgi command : spawn-fcgi -f FILE -s /tmp/nginx.socket ( And change the mod of /tmp/nginx.socket to 777 ). This times it works well too . Then I just did a simple test for this two different way of connections between nginx and spawn-fcgi . I use webbench to do this test : webbench -c 100 [http://IP/](http://IP/) This is the result: USE TCP Method: Speed=5730 pages/min, 14038 bytes/sec. Requests: 2865 susceed, 0 failed. USE UNIX SOCKET Method: Speed=5548 pages/min, 13592 bytes/sec. Requests: 2774 susceed, 0 failed. Why the test shows that TCP method is faster than Unix Socket ? And an other quertion is :during the TCP Method test ,I typed : netstat -an | grep 9000 ,this were many ports shows TIME WAIT .almost over 3,000 . when the webbench is over ,zhe TIME WAIT ports number is decrease. Why this ,And is it safe ? THANKS ---
**Author:** ![SanCao\_Jie](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/b38774/32.png) [@SanCao\_Jie](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/SanCao_Jie)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2010, 1:53pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/a-question-of-fastcgi-pass-method/197615/2 "2010-10-17T13:53:58Z")
Hello! On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 06:42:51PM +0800, SanCao Jie wrote: […] > Speed=5548 pages/min, 13592 bytes/sec. > Requests: 2774 susceed, 0 failed. > > Why the test shows that TCP method is faster than Unix Socket ? There are no real reasons why tcp over loopback should be slower than unix sockets. It’s up to OS implementation details. In your particular case it looks like the speed is limited by your fastcgi app, not by nginx or OS. The difference (if any, as your test results don’t include statistical errors) is most likely due to different connection queueing with different sockets used by OS. > And an other quertion is :during the TCP Method test ,I typed : netstat -an > | grep 9000 ,this were many ports shows > TIME WAIT .almost over 3,000 . when the webbench is over ,zhe TIME WAIT > ports number is decrease. > Why this ,And is it safe ? This is per TCP, see RFC 973 for details. See your OS guides to find out what will happen if all possible (src, srcport, dst, dstport) between frontend and backend happen to be in TIME-WAIT. Usually it’s good idea to tune portrange and check for tw reuse/recycle options if you are going to work with high backend connection rates. Maxim D. ---
**Author:** ![SanCao\_Jie](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/b38774/32.png) [@SanCao\_Jie](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/SanCao_Jie)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2010, 3:23pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/a-question-of-fastcgi-pass-method/197615/3 "2010-10-17T15:23:22Z")
Thanks for reply. Now, I have two new questions. (1) , spawn-fcgi -f FILE -a IP -p PORT -F 6 use -F flag to spawn 6 text.py processes. ``` And in this webbench shows that more text.py processes does not ``` have a better performance than single text.py process. ``` Why? ``` (2), Same as the question 1 , there is a multi-processes test . But this time I use nginx’s reverse proxy and upstream . ``` Like this: nginx.config: upstream test { server 127.0.0.1:8080; server 127.0.0.1:8081; server 127.0.0.1:8082; } ``` location / { proxy\_pass [http://test](http://test); proxy\_redirect off; proxy\_set\_header X-Real-IP $remote\_addr; proxy\_set\_header X-Forwarded-For $proxy\_add\_x\_forwarded\_for; } copy test.py twice ,named test1.py and test2,py And run them in turn: python test.py python test1.py 8081 python test2.py 8082 This situation is totally different from question 1 . This use web.py’s web server itself and ONE port with ONE single test.py process. But this time , webbench still show that the performance does not increase . Why? Why multi-processes don’t show a better performance than single one processes? Is it that my python web app is to simple ? It just render some plain text. So ,this app is so easy that just one single process is enough? Today I used the ab tool test the web .It shows that ‘Request Per Second’ is just about 110 . Is this number too little ?