1.6mm page views per day and growing (all dynamic php), this does not inclue a large number of static files (mostly mp3 files) being served as well.<br><br>Nginx is serving both PHP and static files all from the same server.<br>
<br>Main bottleneck right now is PHP processes getting overloaded, probably due to high number of connections (we are working on reducing this number - we have some inefficiencies where a single page may make over 120 requests before completely loading). The other issue is the number of database requests per page can be very high which delays PHP response times and increases queue.<br>
<br>Regardless, we need to add another box, but I'm trying to figure out if best approach is physical LB in front of duplicate nginx boxes, i.e. each box serving both PHP and static files OR more complex solution with one of the boxes acting as master and routing PHP requests via Nginx to other boxes, etc. as well as possibly adding a static server specifically for images and mp3 files.<br>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 5:35 AM, Dinh Pham <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:lists@ruby-forum.com">lists@ruby-forum.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
How high traffic have your sites got?<br>
<br>
In my system, Nginx plays a role of a LB and static file server. It<br>
dispatches .php requests to a pool of Apache instances and PHP FCGI. It<br>
works great for 600 000+ page views per day.<br>
<div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
Ilan Berkner wrote:<br>
> Hi,<br>
> Is it better to use a hardware load balancer in front of multiple nginx<br>
> boxes, each running their own php processes or is it better to use<br>
> nginx's<br>
> upstream functionality and round robin php requests?<br>
<br>
</div></div><font color="#888888">--<br>
Posted via <a href="http://www.ruby-forum.com/" target="_blank">http://www.ruby-forum.com/</a>.<br>
<br>
</font></blockquote></div><br>