[typo] Heavy RAM usage? Instability?

[Jason Bainbridge]

Just for fun and because I've been meaning to anyway I just set Mongrel 
up for my Typo test blog - http://typo.jasonbainbridge.com

-jailshell-2.05b$ ps axwwu | grep mongrel_rails
USER       PID %CPU %MEM   VSZ  RSS TTY      STAT START   TIME COMMAND
jaseone  27558  0.3  0.7 34764 31488 ?       S    14:57   0:17 
/usr/local/bin/ruby /usr/local/bin/mongrel_rails start -d -p 8001 -e 
production -P log/mongrel-1.pid
jaseone  27616  0.1  0.7 34472 31076 ?       S    14:57   0:07 
/usr/local/bin/ruby /usr/local/bin/mongrel_rails start -d -p 8002 -e 
production -P log/mongrel-2.pid
jaseone  27636  0.0  0.5 29020 23692 ?       S    14:57   0:03 
/usr/local/bin/ruby /usr/local/bin/mongrel_rails start -d -p 8003 -e 
production -P log/mongrel-3.pid
jaseone  27680  0.0  0.6 29020 25480 ?       S    14:57   0:03 
/usr/local/bin/ruby /usr/local/bin/mongrel_rails start -d -p 8004 -e 
production -P log/mongrel-4.pid

I have 4 mongrel processes setup just for the hell of it, you probably 
only need 1 or 2, I'm guessing from the above that only the first two in 
the cluster have been invoked to do any work as my site is very low traffic.

I then hammered it with httperf --port 81 --server 127.0.0.1   
--num-conns 10000 --uri / --rate 600

the ps then looked like:

jaseone  27558  0.5  0.7 34764 31028 ?       S    14:57   0:36 
/usr/local/bin/ruby /usr/local/bin/mongrel_rails start -d -p 8001 -e 
production -P log/mongrel-1.pid
jaseone  27616  0.1  0.7 34472 31080 ?       S    14:57   0:08 
/usr/local/bin/ruby /usr/local/bin/mongrel_rails start -d -p 8002 -e 
production -P log/mongrel-2.pid
jaseone  27636  0.0  0.6 31976 28168 ?       S    14:57   0:04 
/usr/local/bin/ruby /usr/local/bin/mongrel_rails start -d -p 8003 -e 
production -P log/mongrel-3.pid
jaseone  27680  0.0  0.6 31804 28364 ?       S    14:57   0:04 
/usr/local/bin/ruby /usr/local/bin/mongrel_rails start -d -p 8004 -e 
production -P log/mongrel-4.pid

That looks pretty good to me! :)

Cheers,
Jason

jennyw wrote:

>Nicholas Van Weerdenburg wrote:
>  
>
>>Someone else also mentioned that scgi might be more memory friendly 
>>then fastcgi. Anyone have any experience with this?
>>    
>>
>I have heard that the SCGI Rails Runner has some issues right now (which 
>is why they're not letting people use it on TextDrive). Also, I don't 
>know whether SRR is under current development or not -- it seems that 
>Zed Shaw has moved on to Mongrel, which sounds like a simpler way to run 
>Rails apps than either SCGI or FCGI.
>
>Anyone running Mongrel on this list want to share mem stats?
>
>Jen
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Typo-list mailing list
>Typo-list at rubyforge.org
>http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/typo-list
>  
>