Re: [cobalt-developers] Concurrent Users

["Christian Wieczorek" <wieczorek@xxxxxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Werby" <steve-lists@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <cobalt-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2002 3:09 PM
Subject: Re: [cobalt-developers] Concurrent Users


> If I understand you right, you're asking if 200 people can be visiting the
> website you describe at the same time.  Absolutely.  I expect you could
> handle thousands of concurrent users, though it really depends on how much
> CPU time each page requires to load, how long each user stays on the page
> before visitng another on the server and what else is happening on the
> server at the same time.  I have built database-driven, content/data-heavy
> sites for clients hosted on RaQ servers that have served up pages to
several
> thousand concurrent users.  For argument's sake, let's say that the
average
> user spends 20 seconds on a pertinent content-heavy page and 3 seconds on
a
> non-pertinent content-light page.  Since the average HTML page takes a
small
> fraction of a second of CPU time and the average PHP time takes a small
(but
> relatively larger) fraction of a second of CPU time, assuming page
requests
> are somewhat normally distributed you'd be able to accomodate "concurrent
> users" to an order of several magnitudes greater than "concurrent
processes"
> which is probably the true bottleneck in your scenario.

You served websites to several thousand concurrent users ? Are you sure?
On ONE machine? I think that can't be true. The max. concurrent user value
apache could handle without a recompile is 512 if i remember right. Even
WITH a recompile putting the value over 1024 is REALLY hard for most
webservers and so for a standard RAQ4.
Not only CPU time is a point but also there are the Processlist, MEM usage,
I/O ... and so on.
Serving serveral thousand user ... even several HUNDRED users on one machine
is a dream wich cant be realised with a RAQ4.
Building high traffic webservers is no fun and you wont get one by putting a
RAQ out of the box. Pure system tweaking!
Just my 2 cents...

Ciao...
 Chris