The number of worker_process seems to be relative with amount of CPUs?
–
Ren Xiaolei
The number of worker_process seems to be relative with amount of CPUs?
–
Ren Xiaolei
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 10:42 AM, 任晓磊 [email protected] wrote:
The number of worker_process seems to be relative with amount of CPUs?
True ![]()
Cheers,
-agentzh
How many worker_process per CPU core do you like?
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 2:58 PM, agentzh [email protected] wrote:
True
–
Ren Xiaolei
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 3:06 PM, 任晓磊 [email protected] wrote:
How many worker_process per CPU core do you like?
One ![]()
I can get my core running 100% with a single nginx worker process that
itself is hitting my mysql database via ngx_drizzle ![]()
Cheers,
-agentzh
Should I increase buffer size to achieve block-free?
Else, one processor per CPU core might be not enough.
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 3:10 PM, agentzh [email protected] wrote:
-agentzh
nginx mailing list
[email protected]
nginx Info Page
–
Ren Xiaolei
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 3:12 PM, 任晓磊 [email protected] wrote:
Should I increase buffer size to achieve block-free?
Else, one processor per CPU core might be not enough.
Yup, disk operations always block the current worker.
Cheers,
-agentzh
I’m sorry, I cannot understand such huge source.
Do you mean one worker can serve only one request at a time?
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 3:53 PM, agentzh [email protected] wrote:
Yup, disk operations always block the current worker.
–
Ren Xiaolei
This forum is not affiliated to the Ruby language, Ruby on Rails framework, nor any Ruby applications discussed here.
Sponsor our Newsletter | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Remote Ruby Jobs