[Mongrel] Design flaw? - num_processors, accept/close

Evan Weaver evan at cloudbur.st
Tue Oct 16 01:55:05 EDT 2007

> At least piling them in mongrel means some IO is getting processed.

Ok, that's the real issue then. When you have a heavy queuing
situation, Ruby can at least schedule the IO among the green threads
whereas Apache has to keep them serialized waiting for a worker to
open up.


On 10/16/07, Zed A. Shaw <zedshaw at zedshaw.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 16:43:34 -0700
> "Brian Williams" <bwillenator at gmail.com> wrote:
> > We recently ran into exactly this issue.  Some rails requests were making
> > external requests that were taking 5 minutes (networking issues out of our
> > control).
> Now that's a design flaw.  If you're expecting the UI user to wait for a backend request that takes 5 minutes then you need to redesign the workflow and interface.  Do it like asynchronous email where the use "sends a request", "awaits a reply", "reads the reply", and doesn't deal with the backend processing chain of events.
> If done right, you'll even get a performance boost and you can distribute the load of these requests out to other servers.  It's also a model most users are familiar with from SMTP processing.
> --
> Zed A. Shaw
> - Hate: http://savingtheinternetwithhate.com/
> - Good: http://www.zedshaw.com/
> - Evil: http://yearofevil.com/
> _______________________________________________
> Mongrel-users mailing list
> Mongrel-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/mongrel-users

Evan Weaver
Cloudburst, LLC

More information about the Mongrel-users mailing list