On Thu, 07 Dec 2006 14:25:03 +0530, quasi quasilists@gmail.com wrote:

We are using Apache+mod_lisp2+TBNL for our website. The load has sorta spiked of late, we serve approx 4-5 concurrent pages (which are heavy, computationally and in size). We are using Allegro CL.

The thing observed is that there are about 70-100 tbnl-worker threads which I dont think are doing anything much. There is a limit of 230 threads on the Allegro CL and this 100 threads becomes worrysome. I think they have a timeout and the die eventually, but I wonder at their existance and if they could be made to die an early death (I could give them some cig's but ...). :)

In Hunchentoot, you should be able to use the READ-TIMEOUT parameter of START-SERVER to control how long worker threads are supposed to live if they're idle. In TBNL, things are a bit muddled due to the usage of KMRCL - you have to find out yourself depending on your implementation.

BTW is it good time to move from TBNL -> Hunchentoot ? Because it's a live system and 'if it aint broke dont fix it' comes to me mind.

If you have a live system that's working fine with TBNL, then don't switch. I think in that case it's better to be safe than sorry... :)

But note that there won't be any improvements or bugfixes for TBNL in the future.

Any ideas about the performance etc. ? I did some initial benchmarks and seems to be a tad slower than apache+mod_lisp2+TBNL ... but the benchmarks were not serious. I will do them again.

ATM, Hunchentoot is definitely slower than TBNL, see recent postings (last month?) to this list. I have patched FLEXI-STREAMS to improve Hunchentoot performance, but I haven't yet found the time to test and commit these changes.

I doubt that the performance differences really matter for you with five concurrent pages, though.

Cheers, Edi.