Should worker_processes be kept to 1, I read somewhere that with lighty
you should do this or all the information for eaccelerator gets
duplicated with each process, is this an issue with nginx?
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 11:59:27PM +0200, Chris W. wrote:
Should worker_processes be kept to 1, I read somewhere that with lighty
you should do this or all the information for eaccelerator gets
duplicated with each process, is this an issue with nginx?
nginx does not launch PHP processes, therefore there is no relations
between nginx worker and PHP processes.
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 5:59 PM, Chris W. [email protected]
wrote:
Should worker_processes be kept to 1, I read somewhere that with lighty
you should do this or all the information for eaccelerator gets
duplicated with each process, is this an issue with nginx?Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
I believe in the documentation it suggests that you set
worker_processes to the number of CPU cores on the system.
As for how this influences a PHP Opcode cacher, I’m not sure. I
currently run XCache with my setup, and it does seem to be working
just fine. Although I have not looked into the memory usage of PHP as
of yet.
Igor S. wrote:
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 11:59:27PM +0200, Chris W. wrote:
Should worker_processes be kept to 1, I read somewhere that with lighty
you should do this or all the information for eaccelerator gets
duplicated with each process, is this an issue with nginx?nginx does not launch PHP processes, therefore there is no relations
between nginx worker and PHP processes.
Great Thanks!