Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: pgfoundry moved ...

From: "Magnus Hagander" <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>
To: "Oleg Bartunov" <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su>
Cc: "Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>,"Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>,"Gavin M(dot) Roy" <gmr(at)ehpg(dot)net>, "Josh Berkus" <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>,<pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pgfoundry moved ...
Date: 2005-04-29 21:49:19
Message-ID: 6BCB9D8A16AC4241919521715F4D8BCE6C73C7@algol.sollentuna.se (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-www
>> Um. You really aren't up to speed on how things are, are you? ;-) We
>> *do* use static frontends. Five of them actually, globally 
>distributed.
>> This is not where the performance problem is.
>
>I see that your static frontend has PHP compiled and other stuff.
>
>curl -I http://pgfoundry.org/
>HTTP/1.1 200 OK
>Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 19:04:14 GMT
>Server: Apache/1.3.33 (Unix) mod_auth_pgsql/0.9.12 PHP/4.3.11
>X-Powered-By: PHP/4.3.11
>Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8

I was talking about www.postgresql.org, not pgfoundry.org. I realise the
subject still says pgfoundry, but the discussion was more along the
performance of www.postgresql.org at this stage..


>it's silly. All that stuff eat resources. Even old pentium would 
>serve a lot of *static* pages without problem, you don't need 
>"globally distributed" 
>frontends.

As long as it's not used, it hardly makes a difference. Anyway, we need
the distribution mainly for redundancy, not performance.


>> Except the backend is slow *anyway* - even with just the
>> regen-for-frontend stuff loading it down. It doesn't show up 
>for the end
>> user, but it does make the site rebuild slower, whjich means 
>it has to
>> run less frequently (once/hour for the most often updated stuff, less
>> often for docs and ftp tree).
>
>Hmm, not very nice. I don't think pgfoundry is very busy site.
>Is there some web stat available ? How many pages generated 
>dynamically ?
>Could you run simple ab benchmark ? Technology I described is 
>simple, commonly
>adopted and proven in rather busy sites (millions visitors per day).
>Anyway, I just tried to help. Probably, you know more information why 
>services are so slow and has clever idea how to improve situation.

Again, we're discussing differen things.
As for pgfoundry, yes, it seems to put a very high load on the systems,
but I can't talk abuot any details there, since I don't know them. I'm
sure there are many different ways to solve those issues.

//Magnus

Responses

pgsql-www by date

Next:From: Oleg BartunovDate: 2005-04-29 21:52:56
Subject: Re: pgfoundry moved ...
Previous:From: Marc G. FournierDate: 2005-04-29 21:46:19
Subject: Re: pgfoundry moved ...

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group