Re: gateway application timeouts
This WebDNA talk-list message is from 1998
It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 18554
interpreted = N
texte = Hi Sandy, > >Our path to stability included getting rid of possibility of large search >results (who needs to surf through thousands of results). The server >didn't become rock solid until we off-loaded the graphics onto another >server. Now there's no conflict between WebCat hogging the processor and >Webstar serving the graphics.We have a graphics unix box serving probably 80% of our graphics already, and we limit search results. This webcat box serves probably about 60,000 hits per day, including some stray graphic files. At this level we don't even bump into our 30 max connections per day.>I'd follow Ken's suggestions of minimizing work done by WebCat - ie don't >run pages through WebCat unnecessarily.Probably good advice. But everything we build these days involves webcat. I have to check Ken's suggestion about InterpretAll set to F and will continue this thread shortly...We used to put but I'm pretty sure we now have InterpreAll set to T and don't put it on the templates in some cases.I'd also run some RAM checker >programs to make sure all the chips are good. You'd be suprised at how >poor the quality control is for RAM these days. Since WebCat is RAM >based, that could really upset the server. Perhaps just increasing RAM >allocation would help too.Can anyone suggest a reliable RAM checker? thanks, Karl Regards, Karl Schroll Digital Frontier, http://www.digitalfrontier.com 1813 Mountain Road, PO Box 1171 Stowe, VT 05672 USA 802-253-8612
Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:
Hi Sandy, > >Our path to stability included getting rid of possibility of large search >results (who needs to surf through thousands of results). The server >didn't become rock solid until we off-loaded the graphics onto another >server. Now there's no conflict between WebCat hogging the processor and >Webstar serving the graphics.We have a graphics unix box serving probably 80% of our graphics already, and we limit search results. This webcat box serves probably about 60,000 hits per day, including some stray graphic files. At this level we don't even bump into our 30 max connections per day.>I'd follow Ken's suggestions of minimizing work done by WebCat - ie don't >run pages through WebCat unnecessarily.Probably good advice. But everything we build these days involves webcat. I have to check Ken's suggestion about InterpretAll set to F and will continue this thread shortly...We used to put but I'm pretty sure we now have InterpreAll set to T and don't put it on the templates in some cases.I'd also run some RAM checker >programs to make sure all the chips are good. You'd be suprised at how >poor the quality control is for RAM these days. Since WebCat is RAM >based, that could really upset the server. Perhaps just increasing RAM >allocation would help too.Can anyone suggest a reliable RAM checker? thanks, Karl Regards, Karl Schroll Digital Frontier, http://www.digitalfrontier.com 1813 Mountain Road, PO Box 1171 Stowe, VT 05672 USA 802-253-8612
Karl Schroll
DOWNLOAD WEBDNA NOW!
Top Articles:
Talk List
The WebDNA community talk-list is the best place to get some help: several hundred extremely proficient programmers with an excellent knowledge of WebDNA and an excellent spirit will deliver all the tips and tricks you can imagine...
Related Readings:
Country & Ship-to address & other fields ? (1997)
4.5 on 10.4 (2006)
Email truncation in Eudora. (1998)
Round up prices (2000)
F*** you (1998)
Stinkin' [Referrer] (1998)
Freeze (2003)
[WebDNA] HTTP Streaming -- impossible? (2010)
[WebDNA] Build Name for 6.1 (2008)
Notepad problems (1998)
Help! WebCat2 bug (1997)
select multiple (1997)
ShrPAUL1@aol.com has been banned (2000)
Error:Too many nested [xxx] contexts (1997)
For those of you not on the WebCatalog Beta... (1997)
Newbie Progress! (2000)
Can't add a field (1998)
Generating unique SKU from [cart] (1997)
Semi-OT: PanIP patent infringement case (2001)
Date problems (1997)