Bugzilla 3.0 and mod_perl

Bugzilla 3.0 and mod_perl

[Daniel Berlin]

I'm going to be upgrading our bugzilla installs to 3.0 in a few weeks

One of the nicer features is that you can run multiple db's from one
bugzilla install, so i can eliminate the need for the two copies we
have now.

Bugzilla 3.0 also supports running under mod_perl.

Under mod_perl, the cpu usage is *greatly* decreased, but the memory
usage is heavily increased.

My guess is that it would take 100-200 meg of memory in process in our httpds.

I'm not sure whether this is a good tradeoff for us.

Thoughts?

Re: Bugzilla 3.0 and mod_perl

[Frank Ch. Eigler]

HI -

> I'm going to be upgrading our bugzilla installs to 3.0 in a few weeks

Great.

> One of the nicer features is that you can run multiple db's from one
> bugzilla install, so i can eliminate the need for the two copies we
> have now.

Coincidentally, would it make sense to move the mysql server over to
server2?  How much database traffic is there?

> Bugzilla 3.0 also supports running under mod_perl.  Under mod_perl,
> the cpu usage is *greatly* decreased, but the memory usage is
> heavily increased [100-200 MB]

If that's per-httpd-process, then it's obviously too much.  If it's
shared amongst the httpd's, it should be OK.  Any idea what would take
up all that memory though?
 
- FChE

Re: Bugzilla 3.0 and mod_perl

[Christopher Faylor]

On Thu, May 31, 2007 at 01:27:53PM -0400, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
>HI -
>
>> I'm going to be upgrading our bugzilla installs to 3.0 in a few weeks
>
>Great.
>
>> One of the nicer features is that you can run multiple db's from one
>> bugzilla install, so i can eliminate the need for the two copies we
>> have now.
>
>Coincidentally, would it make sense to move the mysql server over to
>server2?  How much database traffic is there?
>
>> Bugzilla 3.0 also supports running under mod_perl.  Under mod_perl,
>> the cpu usage is *greatly* decreased, but the memory usage is
>> heavily increased [100-200 MB]
>
>If that's per-httpd-process, then it's obviously too much.  If it's
>shared amongst the httpd's, it should be OK.  Any idea what would take
>up all that memory though?

Is this something we can experiment with, i.e., turn it on for a while
to observe and then turn it off if we notice negative consequences?

cgf

Re: Bugzilla 3.0 and mod_perl

[Daniel Berlin]

On 5/31/07, Frank Ch. Eigler <fche@redhat.com> wrote:
> HI -
>
> > I'm going to be upgrading our bugzilla installs to 3.0 in a few weeks
>
> Great.
>
> > One of the nicer features is that you can run multiple db's from one
> > bugzilla install, so i can eliminate the need for the two copies we
> > have now.
>
> Coincidentally, would it make sense to move the mysql server over to
> server2?  How much database traffic is there?

We average about 47 queries per second, however over the course of 30
million queries, only 15 have shown up as being "slow".
The default is that any query taking longer than 1 second is
considered slow.  So i don't think we are having that much issue with
mysql speed or load :)

Uptime: 638886  Threads: 1  Questions: 30021162  Slow queries: 15
Opens: 183  Flush tables: 1  Open tables: 177  Queries per second avg:
46.990


>
> > Bugzilla 3.0 also supports running under mod_perl.  Under mod_perl,
> > the cpu usage is *greatly* decreased, but the memory usage is
> > heavily increased [100-200 MB]
>
> If that's per-httpd-process, then it's obviously too much.

It is, AFAIK.  It is shared among threads/children, but not separate processes.

>  If it's
> shared amongst the httpd's, it should be OK.  Any idea what would take
> up all that memory though?
>
God only knows, since it's perl :)

I ust know what the bugzilla release notes say.
I haven't tried it.

> - FChE
>