load balancing

walt wa1ter at myrealbox.com
Sun Nov 5 04:27:48 PST 2006


1103073858.GB829 at xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <454c434a$0$788$415eb37d at xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <200611050130.kA51UsoS011131 at xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
In-Reply-To: <200611050130.kA51UsoS011131 at xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <454dd899$0$788$415eb37d at xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 69.234.191.24
X-Trace: 1162729625 crater_reader.dragonflybsd.org 788 69.234.191.24
Xref: crater_reader.dragonflybsd.org dragonfly.users:7945

Matthew Dillon wrote:
>  ...In fact, if machine overhead is the biggest issue then the most extreme
>     answer is to not use threading at all... instead, go with a strict
>     kqueue poll for the core web server and fork one process for each cpu on
>     the system...

Is this kind of change something that can be done just by changing
the server's config files?  Or would it involve rewriting code?





More information about the Users mailing list