[Mongrel] memory issues -- mongrel part of the problem?

Joey Geiger jgeiger at gmail.com
Wed Nov 15 21:57:16 EST 2006


Just put an app into production, and I've got monit watching the
mongrel cluster. If an instance gets above 75mb for more than 2.5
minutes, that mongrel is restarted. I've actually had them restart a
few times now. It's something that I'll be looking into over the next
couple of weeks though.

On 11/15/06, Ross Riley <riley.ross at gmail.com> wrote:
> I'll jump in on this one too.
> We've found about the same when using RMagick with mongrel. We've got
> sites on a dedicated server with a stack of RAM and 3 mongrel servers
> per app and they seem to cope ok. However I ran another site on a VPS
> with 128mb of RAM and a single mongrel server and often, depending on
> the uploaded image, the server will completely lock up.
>
> I have monit running on this server, but if it goes, it needs a root
> login to force quit all processes and then a restart of the server to
> cure, monit won't restart it. I don't know what everyone else has
> found, but I'd say that if you're going to use RMagick, you need
> plenty of spare RAM capacity.
>
>
>
> On 11/15/06, kigsteronline at mac.com <kigsteronline at mac.com> wrote:
> >
> > We are using RMagick / mongrel / apache, and recently had to run a
> > migration that had to process approximately 7000 images, by
> > generating a thumbnail and a JPEG out of a large PNG.
> >
> > The migration took about 5 minutes to complete, and while it was
> > running I was watching the RAM/CPU of the rake process that was
> > running it.  The process RSS was fluctuating between 200Mb and
> > 500Mb... It seems like once the garbage collection kicked in, the RSS
> > went down by up to 300Mb, and then slowly climb back up.   Clearly,
> > this is a very high memory footprint for a web server process, but
> > should be acceptable for a dedicated background process.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Konstantin
> >
> >
> > On Nov 15, 2006, at 8:15 AM, Carl Lerche wrote:
> >
> > > I've been using RMagick within my rails apps for all my image
> > > manipulation needs so far. I have been wondering about how the image
> > > stuff was handled memory wise. Everything has been running smoothly so
> > > far so I didn't really worry about it. In the future though, what
> > > would be the better approach?
> > >
> > > 1) Using mini_magick within my rails apps
> > > 2) Using RMagick in a BackgroundRB process
> > > - 1+2
> > >
> > > I'm guessing that if mini_magick doesn't load anything into memory,
> > > running it inside the rails app should be fine?
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Mongrel-users mailing list
> > Mongrel-users at rubyforge.org
> > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/mongrel-users
> >
>
>
> --
> Ross Riley
> www.sorrylies.com
> _______________________________________________
> Mongrel-users mailing list
> Mongrel-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/mongrel-users
>


More information about the Mongrel-users mailing list