anything left before 1.0?

Andrew Grim andrew at kongregate.com
Tue Jun 15 21:05:41 EDT 2010


> Let us know if there's anything else missing, pipe up within the next 24
> hours or so...
>
> You can always email me privately if you don't want your address on the
> public mailing list.  Don't send HTML mail, though.

Hey Eric,

I was hoping to spend some more time debugging myself, but since you
were going to release 1.0 I thought I'd get your thoughts on this.
Quick overview, I work for kongregate.com, one of the larger rails
sites, and one of the only large sites (that I know of personally)
running ruby 1.9.  We are currently running mostly mongrels, but I've
got one server testing Unicorn.  Things are mostly great, we are
seeing nearly 20ms improvement in average response time, which is
awesome.  Now to the issue.

SYMPTOM: The master process is killing the workers fairly frequently
based on the workers timing out.

CAUSE: I've added some logging to get the backtrace when I send a
SIGTERM, and it is always stuck on line 68 in http_response.rb:

      body.each { |chunk| socket.write(chunk) }

I ran some straces, and here's an example of the last few lines where
it gets killed:

06:50:23.239931 clock_gettime(CLOCK_REALTIME, {1276523423, 239967000})
= 0 <0.000172>
06:50:23.240213 write(12, "HTTP/1.1 200 OK\r\nDate: Mon, 14 J"...,
1896) = 1896 <0.000087>
06:50:23.242072 write(12, "<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC \"-//W3C//D"...,
166842) = 128000 <0.000107>
06:50:23.242230 select(13, NULL, [12], NULL, NULL <unfinished ...>
06:51:22.167122 +++ killed by SIGKILL +++

So it's writing and then (to my understanding) waiting on the socket
to return, but you can see that for a full 60s it isn't.

My best guess off-hand is that the large size of the string being
written to the socket is causing an issue, and I have noticed that it
is happening primarily on requests that return larger payloads.  At
the same time, it isn't that much data, so I'm a little surprised it
would be an issue.  I am planning on trying to split the body up into
smaller chunks in a rack middleware or something.

Or I could be totally off.  Just wanted to see if you have any ideas,
I'm not even sure this is a Unicorn issue, definitely could be ruby
1.9 bug too.

Sorry about the long email, but I appreciate any help you can give. Thanks,
Andrew


More information about the mongrel-unicorn mailing list