# Help me test and verify my config **URL:** \ **Category:** NGINX\ **Created:** [June 24, 2012, 2:24am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/help-me-test-and-verify-my-config/220889 "2012-06-24T02:24:03Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![aris](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/a/258eb7/32.png) [@aris](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/aris)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2012, 2:24am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/help-me-test-and-verify-my-config/220889/1 "2012-06-24T02:24:03Z")
Nginx community, i’ve recently switched to this awesome software which has performed admirably under load testing. I host a php/mysql driven site that with each page view serves results from multiple external xml feeds in realtime. Once we have the XML data we cache results to reduce load. I run nginx / php5-fpm / memcache and APC. Site gets \> 100,000 searches per day. Each query takes between 1 and 4 seconds depending on the search. So as you can imagine the processes don’t open and close as quickly as some more basic php sites. Server load is around 3 average for a quad core box. So OK… But i wanted your expert opinion on how to check, test and verify my config params for nginx and php5-fpm. I want to be 100% sure i haven’t allocated too many processes. So without pasting my entire config, i will show just the bits i’m concerned i wish to check with you guys. php5-fpm tweaks Concerns - is max\_children / start servers too high? Would they take up CPU processes wasting resources? pm = dynamic pm.max\_children = 30 pm.start\_servers = 15 pm.min\_spare\_servers = 5 pm.max\_spare\_servers = 30 pm.max\_requests = 511 listen.backlog = 1024 Worker\_processes 4 worker\_connections 8192 fastcgi\_params Concerns - is my fastcgi\_buffers too much? The reason why i set them high is that each XML result can contain a lot of data. fastcgi\_connect\_timeout 60; fastcgi\_send\_timeout 180; fastcgi\_read\_timeout 180; fastcgi\_buffer\_size 128k; fastcgi\_buffers 256 16k; fastcgi\_busy\_buffers\_size 256k; fastcgi\_temp\_file\_write\_size 256k; Even under load, memory usage only reaches about 45% so perhaps i’m wasting an opportunity to cache more things in memory. Thank you Posted at Nginx Forum: > **[Help me test and verify my config](https://forum.nginx.org/read.php?2,227820,227820#msg-227820)** > > Nginx community, i've recently switched to this awesome software which has performed admirably under load testing. I host a php/mysql driven site that with each page view serves results from multiple external xml feeds in realtime. Once we have the... ---
**Author:** ![bp1000](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@bp1000](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/bp1000)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2012, 8:50am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/help-me-test-and-verify-my-config/220889/2 "2012-06-24T08:50:08Z")
Ok, so what is your question? thanks, mike On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 12:23 AM, bp1000 [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > quickly as some more basic php sites. Server load is around 3 average > CPU processes wasting resources? > worker\_connections 8192 > fastcgi\_busy\_buffers\_size 256k; > > * * * > > nginx mailing list > [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) > [mailman.nginx.org archive](http://mailman.nginx.org/mailman/listinfo/nginx) – James Michael DuPont Member of Free Libre Open Source Software Kosova [http://flossk.org](http://flossk.org) Contributor FOSM, the CC-BY-SA map of the world [http://fosm.org](http://fosm.org) Mozilla Rep [https://reps.mozilla.org/u/h4ck3rm1k3](https://reps.mozilla.org/u/h4ck3rm1k3) ---
**Author:** ![bp1000](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@bp1000](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/bp1000)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2012, 6:21am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/help-me-test-and-verify-my-config/220889/3 "2012-06-25T06:21:02Z")
The question is buried inside the details. It’s, I guess, this: “But i wanted your expert opinion on how to check, test and verify my config params for nginx and php5-fpm. I want to be 100% sure i haven’t allocated too many processes.” Openly yours, Shankar Dhanasekaran ---
**Author:** ![bp1000](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@bp1000](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/bp1000)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2012, 6:34pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/help-me-test-and-verify-my-config/220889/4 "2012-06-26T18:34:39Z")
Yes, i just wanted an expert opinion on verifying my parameters I felt it necessary to explain the application, environment and parameters. Just as a follow up; i found that the pm = dynamic config i was using whilst serving OK for visitor, it seemed to be using twice the processing that a pm = static used up. So i have switched to an entirely static allocation. I projected that each child process consumes about 50Mb with overheads and therefore allocated 40 child processes for php5-fpm So far so good. I’m still getting connection reset by peer but i’m 99% sure this is people who click back or stop the load before the page finishes. As we get over 100k searches per day, 10-15 connection reset by peer errors are fine. The only thing is, only 50% of my memory is being used so maybe i can allocate more somewhere. Posted at Nginx Forum: > **[Re: Help me test and verify my config](https://forum.nginx.org/read.php?2,227820,227943#msg-227943)** > > Nginx community, i've recently switched to this awesome software which has performed admirably under load testing. I host a php/mysql driven site that with each page view serves results from multiple external xml feeds in realtime. Once we have the... ---
**Author:** ![bp1000](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@bp1000](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/bp1000)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2012, 9:44pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/help-me-test-and-verify-my-config/220889/5 "2012-06-26T21:44:37Z")
may i suggest [How To Ask Questions The Smart Way](http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html) On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 4:34 PM, bp1000 [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > So i have switched to an entirely static allocation. > are fine. > [mailman.nginx.org archive](http://mailman.nginx.org/mailman/listinfo/nginx) > – > James Michael DuPont > Member of Free Libre Open Source Software Kosova [http://flossk.org](http://flossk.org) > Contributor FOSM, the CC-BY-SA map of the world [http://fosm.org](http://fosm.org) > Mozilla Rep [https://reps.mozilla.org/u/h4ck3rm1k3](https://reps.mozilla.org/u/h4ck3rm1k3) ---
**Author:** ![bp1000](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@bp1000](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/bp1000)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2012, 4:19pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/help-me-test-and-verify-my-config/220889/6 "2012-06-27T16:19:58Z")
Mike, sure I thought my post title was very clear; couldn’t have been any clearer. I guess i may as well have posted a dancing cat purely for entertainment value. Perhaps my post wasn’t that clear then. Fair enough. I had searched and clawed over tonnes of information. In fact i spent quite a few hours looking. However, it seems not 1 set of parameters is suitable for every nginx + php5-fpm set up, which is sensible really. I’m not a natural sysadmin and as it was the weekend my sysadmin was unavailable, probably off geocaching or something. What i couldn’t find is enough info on how to test and verify my chosen config. Due to the volume of traffic and revenue involved i didnt want it to be trial and error. I also wanted an expert eye cast over the chosen params in case anything jumped out as obviously incorrect. Posted at Nginx Forum: > **[Re: Help me test and verify my config](https://forum.nginx.org/read.php?2,227820,227998#msg-227998)** > > Nginx community, i've recently switched to this awesome software which has performed admirably under load testing. I host a php/mysql driven site that with each page view serves results from multiple external xml feeds in realtime. Once we have the...