Mailing List Archive: Apache: Docs

Performance tuning documentation

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

rbowen at rcbowen

Nov 12, 2009, 8:30 AM

Post #1 of 6 (1003 views)
Permalink

Performance tuning documentation

The performance tuning documentation that we currently include in the
docs is simply awful. What with the comments about Apache 1.2 and the
suggestions of how to deal with the new Linux 2.0 kernel, I think it's
beyond fixing. It needs to be tossed and rewritten - although perhaps
there are parts that are salvageable.

I was wondering if someone has a performance doc that they could
contribute as a starting place? Perhaps Sander's talk from AC? Or if
someone would be willing to give some attention to the docs list for a
while to assist in writing something that would be useful to actual
admins in the real world.

--
Rich Bowen
rbowen [at] rcbowen

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe [at] httpd
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help [at] httpd

minfrin at sharp

Nov 13, 2009, 2:52 AM

Post #2 of 6 (958 views)
Permalink

Re: Performance tuning documentation [In reply to]

Rich Bowen wrote:

> The performance tuning documentation that we currently include in the
> docs is simply awful. What with the comments about Apache 1.2 and the
> suggestions of how to deal with the new Linux 2.0 kernel, I think it's
> beyond fixing. It needs to be tossed and rewritten - although perhaps
> there are parts that are salvageable.
>
> I was wondering if someone has a performance doc that they could
> contribute as a starting place? Perhaps Sander's talk from AC? Or if
> someone would be willing to give some attention to the docs list for a
> while to assist in writing something that would be useful to actual
> admins in the real world.

Something else related that I think we should address are our default
config files and performance.

Up till now, the build has assumed that if a module was built, then a
LoadModule line should appear in the default config file for that
module. Because distros typically compile most (if not all) of the
modules, most (if not all) of the modules end up being loaded into the
server by default, in turn meaning lots of hook calling and per-request
config parsing is being done for no reason.

A pattern I've adopted is to put the load module alongside the config
fragment that requires it, like this:

<IfModule !mod_foo.c>
LoadModule foo_module mod_foo.so
</LoadModule>

If the config fragment isn't used, the corresponding module isn't loaded.

Regards,
Graham
--

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe [at] httpd
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help [at] httpd

i.galic at brainsware

Nov 13, 2009, 3:39 AM

Post #3 of 6 (953 views)
Permalink

Re: Performance tuning documentation [In reply to]

----- "Graham Leggett" <minfrin [at] sharp> wrote:

> Rich Bowen wrote:
>
> > The performance tuning documentation that we currently include in
> the
> > docs is simply awful. What with the comments about Apache 1.2 and
> the
> > suggestions of how to deal with the new Linux 2.0 kernel, I think
> it's
> > beyond fixing. It needs to be tossed and rewritten - although
> perhaps
> > there are parts that are salvageable.
> >
> > I was wondering if someone has a performance doc that they could
> > contribute as a starting place? Perhaps Sander's talk from AC? Or
> if
> > someone would be willing to give some attention to the docs list for
> a
> > while to assist in writing something that would be useful to actual
> > admins in the real world.
>
> Something else related that I think we should address are our default
> config files and performance.
>
> Up till now, the build has assumed that if a module was built, then a
> LoadModule line should appear in the default config file for that
> module. Because distros typically compile most (if not all) of the
> modules, most (if not all) of the modules end up being loaded into
> the
> server by default, in turn meaning lots of hook calling and
> per-request
> config parsing is being done for no reason.

It's been a long time now, but I still remember Rich asking for a
Apache httpd starting *without* a config.
I'm not sure this is easily doable, but I'm pretty confident that
we can slim down the basic config (httpd.conf) to a very minimalistic
level and put all the fluff in extra

Matthew's configs are pretty good example of how to do it right:

http://www.linux-corner.info/httpd/httpd.conf
http://www.linux-corner.info/httpd/httpd-simple.conf

They are short and quite clear on what they,

> [snip]

So long
--
Igor Galić

Tel: +43 (0) 699 122 96 338
Fax: +43 (0) 1 90 89 226
Mail: i.galic [at] brainsware
URL: http://brainsware.org/

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe [at] httpd
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help [at] httpd

i.galic at brainsware

Jan 14, 2010, 4:38 PM

Post #4 of 6 (803 views)
Permalink

Re: Performance tuning documentation [In reply to]

Hi folks.

I've taken a first, awkward stab at the performance documentation.

> The performance tuning documentation that we currently include in the
> docs is simply awful. What with the comments about Apache 1.2 and the
> suggestions of how to deal with the new Linux 2.0 kernel, I think it's
> beyond fixing. It needs to be tossed and rewritten - although perhaps
> there are parts that are salvageable.

That's basically what I've attempted to do.
I've thrown out everything that's older than a decade, or otherwise
obsolete, or just confusing.

> I was wondering if someone has a performance doc that they could
> contribute as a starting place? Perhaps Sander's talk from AC? Or if
> someone would be willing to give some attention to the docs list for a
> while to assist in writing something that would be useful to actual
> admins in the real world.

Unfortunately, I have never attended any of those talks...
I did however borrow a line from from colmmacc's blog:
http://www.stdlib.net/~colmmacc/2006/03/23/niagara-vs-ftpheanetie-showdown/

This patch is not trying to be complete -- or accurate in its spelling,
for that matter.
It's just supposed to throw away the crusty old bits, which in turn I
hope will get people motivated enough to start doing something about it.

> --
> Rich Bowen
> rbowen [at] rcbowen

So long,
--
Igor Galić

Tel: +43 (0) 699 122 96 338
Fax: +43 (0) 1 90 89 226
Mail: i.galic [at] brainsware
URL: http://brainsware.org/

Attachments:

perf-tuning.patch (23.4 KB)

sander at temme

Feb 3, 2010, 7:37 PM

Post #5 of 6 (717 views)
Permalink

Re: Performance tuning documentation [In reply to]

On Nov 12, 2009, at 8:30 AM, Rich Bowen wrote:

> The performance tuning documentation that we currently include in the docs is simply awful. What with the comments about Apache 1.2 and the suggestions of how to deal with the new Linux 2.0 kernel, I think it's beyond fixing. It needs to be tossed and rewritten - although perhaps there are parts that are salvageable.
>
> I was wondering if someone has a performance doc that they could contribute as a starting place? Perhaps Sander's talk from AC? Or if someone would be willing to give some attention to the docs list for a while to assist in writing something that would be useful to actual admins in the real world.

I am willing to contribute my performance talk material, since I don't really give that presentation anymore. I have very few cycles, but would be willing to help work on making it suitable for inclusion in the httpd docs.

Over the years, I have tried to concentrate more on the tuning knobs available to the average admin, rather than dig into the operating system or httpd code.

Another source may be Colm's talks, but he is still giving those.

S.

--
sander [at] temme http://www.temme.net/sander/
PGP FP: 51B4 8727 466A 0BC3 69F4 B7B8 B2BE BC40 1529 24AF

Attachments:

smime.p7s (2.38 KB)

i.galic at brainsware

Feb 11, 2010, 4:38 PM

Post #6 of 6 (673 views)
Permalink

Re: Performance tuning documentation [In reply to]

----- "Sander Temme" <sander [at] temme> wrote:

> On Nov 12, 2009, at 8:30 AM, Rich Bowen wrote:
>
> > The performance tuning documentation that we currently include in
> the docs is simply awful. What with the comments about Apache 1.2 and
> the suggestions of how to deal with the new Linux 2.0 kernel, I think
> it's beyond fixing. It needs to be tossed and rewritten - although
> perhaps there are parts that are salvageable.

There are a few parts that might still be usable, like the choice of
the MPM.

> I am willing to contribute my performance talk material, since I don't
> really give that presentation anymore. I have very few cycles, but
> would be willing to help work on making it suitable for inclusion in
> the httpd docs.

Unfortunately, I've never been at any of your talks. I hope I'm not
leaning too far out the window with my suggestion here

> Over the years, I have tried to concentrate more on the tuning knobs
> available to the average admin, rather than dig into the operating
> system or httpd code.

I've been wondering: httpd is very complex. It can be an

* Application Server, serving SSI, CGI, PHP, Perl, Ruby, Python...
* SSL-Off-loading, Caching reverse-proxy that understands
* multiple protocols
* etc..

So a good good starting point for developing our new docs could be to
show the admins - who are our target audience - not developers, I
believe - what can be done generally (briefly: File-system, OS, network)
and what can be done within httpd -- in those scenarios.

Maybe you have other use-cases in mind...

The trouble here is with the first listed: We might be venturing into
foreign waters.

Bye,
--
Igor Galić

Tel: +43 (0) 699 122 96 338
Fax: +43(0) 1 91 333 41
Mail: i.galic [at] brainsware
URL: http://brainsware.org/

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe [at] httpd
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help [at] httpd

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads