Ask HN: How many req per second can a single mongrel server handle of RoR app. | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: How many req per second can a single mongrel server handle of RoR app.

I have a RoR app running a simple hello world program running on a single instance of Mongrel as app container and apache as web server.<p>Its a dual core machine with 2 GB of RAM<p>Can I expect it to handle 150 req. per second?

View on HN

Maybe not the best place to post this... but it depends on how long each request takes. If it's 100ms/avg then a single mongrel thread can do ~10req/sec. Mongrels are single-threaded which is why you usually see 5+ instances. If you are caching so it hits apache and not the mongrel than potentially much higher. If you can switch to nginx passenger though, do it. Much faster and cleaner.

One.

Use Passenger.

FWIW 150 requests per second is peanuts. If your server doesn't reach the mid 2000s serving a typical index page (static or otherwise, at about 4kb) without caching or tweaking, I say ditch it. Life is too short for lousy web servers. Nginx gets 8k out of the box, lightty about 6k or so.

no way you can get a rails app to send 6k requests per second on a single machine. A full page cached page, yes, but no way on rails.

Use the Apache Benchmark "ab" program, and measure the number of requests per second for your application.

It is number of requests per second that should interest you.

If you do not have ab installed, try:

sudo apt-get install apache2-utils

then:

man ab

try benchmarking with apachebench

ab -n 10000 -c 10 http://127.0.0.1/

or install siege (or some other tool).

Use passenger. If you really need speed use rails metal to write your response, rails metal can certainly handle 150 requests per second on a single instance. But should one client be laggy, it will take down the whole server :)

OFF TOPIC:

To add blank lines in your text output here in HN, hit return twice (\n\n).

I think there's a bug in Hacker News where it will convert new lines to an html p and place it back in the text box if there is an error submitting the form (like your title is too long). Instead of waiting for a successful submission to convert the new lines. That said, this is purely speculation based on my experiences.

Confirmed bug. To reproduce: 1) Set title to "Ask HN: Attempting to confirm a bug... aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaa"

Set text to: "here is text

Enter pressed twice, I have not inserted any html tags

If this doesn't error and instead posts it, I apologize."

Click submit. Observe text in the box "text" has changed to: "here is text<p>Enter pressed twice, I have not inserted any html tags<p>If this doesn't error and instead posts it, I apologize."

Reply on news.ycombinator.com