On 23 Oct 2009, at 11:03 PM, Stefan wrote:
I was under the impression that wsapi-fcgi did NOT persist the scripts
between invocations, unless you run each script as it's own fastcgi
server.
Fabio has pitched in a concise answer on this point. I'd add that if
needed you could probably do high-performance shared data in your
solution using lindas amongst the threads, whereas with separate fastcgi
server processes I'm resorting to a solution something akin to a
memcached for Lua tables. Of course if you just use MySQL only the
persistence for the connection matters. (I was getting ~2500rps with
some MySQL queries and app logic.)
Running a couple dozen (at least) extra processes that MUST stay up at
all times doesn't appeal to sysadmin in me.
My main criteria are:
1) lightweight
2) fast
3) reliable, even under extremely heavy loads
4) controllable and intelligent resource utilization
4) easy administration for critical installations
Same here :) But I do think separate fcgi server processes are more
resilient and flexible, if not quite as manageable as a single
multi-threaded process. With balancing across the multiple processes (as
noted in my response to Bertrand, the number of processes would probably
only equal the number of cores), if one of them dies (or is
restarted...) the webserver/proxy will ignore it until it comes back,
and continue distributing requests amongst those that are still up.
