mudmanc4 Posted September 19, 2011 CID Share Posted September 19, 2011 Which one are you using Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TriRan Posted September 20, 2011 CID Share Posted September 20, 2011 Atm xcache but I'm thinking of switching Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlewis23 Posted September 20, 2011 CID Share Posted September 20, 2011 Neither. I use eAccelerator. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TriRan Posted September 20, 2011 CID Share Posted September 20, 2011 interesting i might have to try that one out, does it work well with worker? or only prefork? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlewis23 Posted September 20, 2011 CID Share Posted September 20, 2011 interesting i might have to try that one out, does it work well with worker? or only prefork? Should work just fine with worker but I always use perfork just seems to be more stable for what I need. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TriRan Posted September 20, 2011 CID Share Posted September 20, 2011 yeah i wanted to be able to handle fairly high load so i'm using worker with lighthttpd atm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CA3LE Posted September 20, 2011 CID Share Posted September 20, 2011 Please explain what in the hell you guys are talking about... lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdawnaz Posted September 20, 2011 CID Share Posted September 20, 2011 sounds like they're at work and catching their lunch really fast with a fork beforehand CA3LE 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CA3LE Posted September 20, 2011 CID Share Posted September 20, 2011 sounds like they're at work and catching their lunch really fast with a fork beforehand Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TriRan Posted September 21, 2011 CID Share Posted September 21, 2011 Please explain what in the hell you guys are talking about... lol lol we're talking about apache modules, mpm_worker.c and mpm_prefork.c and how the the php optimization modules work with the two Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CA3LE Posted September 21, 2011 CID Share Posted September 21, 2011 lol we're talking about apache modules, mpm_worker.c and mpm_prefork.c and how the the php optimization modules work with the two Ahh, you'd think I'd know what you're talking about... but I've never heard of those modules. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TriRan Posted September 21, 2011 CID Share Posted September 21, 2011 sure you do! its these ones <IfModule prefork.c> StartServers 8 MinSpareServers 5 MaxSpareServers 12 ServerLimit 50 MaxClients 50 MaxRequestsPerChild 4000 </IfModule> <IfModule worker.c> StartServers 6 MaxClients 150 MinSpareThreads 25 MaxSpareThreads 75 ThreadsPerChild 25 MaxRequestsPerChild 0 </IfModule> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlewis23 Posted September 21, 2011 CID Share Posted September 21, 2011 Please explain what in the hell you guys are talking about... lol Ahh, you'd think I'd know what you're talking about... but I've never heard of those modules. You would think of all people on this site at least you would know what the hell we are talking about. lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mudmanc4 Posted September 21, 2011 Author CID Share Posted September 21, 2011 D why would you use eAccelerator over something like memcache , is it more image friendly ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlewis23 Posted September 21, 2011 CID Share Posted September 21, 2011 D why would you use eAccelerator over something like memcache , is it more image friendly ? In my case it just seems more friendly memory wise, a little faster and works best with one of my PHP scripts. Ever file on my site is downloaded through a PHP script and memcache just seemed to mess that up. It was caching the script for files that were for a different file. eAccelerator doesn't do that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TriRan Posted September 21, 2011 CID Share Posted September 21, 2011 i disabled xcache yesterday because i discovered it was causing heavy load on my server, sometimes spiking the cpu into the 2.00 range when loading a webpage so i switched to zend temporarily because i know it works fine with worker edit: thanks dlewis23 for recommending eAccelerator, i compiled it a few moments ago restarted apache and couldn't be happier with its performance btw it works like a dream with worker even handling 950 Requests a minute (15.8 requests every second) i was still seeing page load times of .44 seconds... i'm sure thats more load then my server will ever see. so under no load at all i'm seeing .15-.22 load times thanks again ~ TriRan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.