From owner-freebsd-apache@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Nov 27 17:21:55 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-apache@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6573E836 for ; Thu, 27 Nov 2014 17:21:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com (out4-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 382A2D3 for ; Thu, 27 Nov 2014 17:21:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74E89207B2 for ; Thu, 27 Nov 2014 12:21:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from web3 ([10.202.2.213]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 27 Nov 2014 12:21:54 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=message-id:x-sasl-enc:from:to :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:in-reply-to :references:subject:date; s=smtpout; bh=xy9eqgRwSNjNlZ048zCo0NPq Bno=; b=hAfa9cKdRReuE4zjJLpZHYuTtYg8oBsvocLHs4GNeZwgRz/kzA0+IAuH 351GDkRKNxC18WBuEsxPEHA2H2jB/LYbCC0p2YdHH/Zm8n1WUQBJrRsIqX4jfCkw idc1agLsfdbATZL2NJiAJ8Hv5wXo4mQ6eFriGL+YjJBJhJy3KFE= Received: by web3.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 99) id 4B52F118312; Thu, 27 Nov 2014 12:21:54 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <1417108914.25537.196133397.26D48C5A@webmail.messagingengine.com> X-Sasl-Enc: A8451iuI0H5v1+2BJv4oiXHIUrsdFSBOeemmnFfnOTVq 1417108914 From: Mark Felder To: freebsd-apache@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface - ajax-53201334 In-Reply-To: <20141126064734.5347ed3a5a163cf4d0c44324@potentialtech.com> References: <20141126064734.5347ed3a5a163cf4d0c44324@potentialtech.com> Subject: Re: prefork MPM still the default for apache24? Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2014 11:21:54 -0600 X-BeenThere: freebsd-apache@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Support of apache-related ports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2014 17:21:55 -0000 On Wed, Nov 26, 2014, at 05:47, Bill Moran wrote: > > I was recently doing some load testing on a new tomcat application I'm > working on. > > Long story short: I found that a performance issue I was hitting was the > result of > Apache being built with the prefork MPM. Rebuilding with the event MPM > increased > performace to the same speed as connecting to tomcat directly, which was > 20x > faster than communicating through Apache using the (default) prefork MPM. > > This is a tomcat 8 app running on FreeBSD 10.0 with Apache 2.4 > > This leads me to a few questions: > > Is there some reason the event MPM is not the default? The Apache > community seems to > think that it should be (at least, the people I talked to). Is there some > obscure > issue with it on FreeBSD? > > Luckily the ports system makes it easy to rebuild Apache with a different > MPM, but > I'm worried that since the prebuilt version installed by pkg still uses > prefork, > that a lot of people are getting an underperforming server for no reason. > Interesting. I think the event model is new in 2.4 I wonder if it's what upstream recommends by default in 2.4...