Getting this working right would involve fine-tuning Apache, PHP and Mysql server parameters, and would be difficult to do if we didn't have a dedicated connection.
No doubt, no doubt.
But, I'm wondering -- is it that broken? Do we really have a problem with the connection/page model? MySQL bug aside, of course. It sounds like a fair amount of work.
is it that broken?
I really don't know. Steve seems to be complaining about something, though.
Steve seems to be complaining about something, though.
As far as I can tell, Steve is complaining about the effect of the bug Rob saw. We're all hitting up one connection right now, apparently due to that.
Sure, we could all persistently share the one connection, but I suspect that no matter how well tuned, that would make for crap performance.
Once our count is reset, however, do you see a perceivable return on investment to it?
Once our count is reset, however, do you see a perceivable return on investment to it?
If the server is restared, and Steve is still complaining about server load, then this is one avenue we should explore.
We are doing multiple connections per page view now, aren't we? We should be using at most one, and that should be easy to fix.
Wipes drool from her chin...
Sexxxxxxxxxay competence and knowledge...
We are doing multiple connections per page view now, aren't we? We should be using at most one, and that should be easy to fix.
We've been doing both. I've switched back and forth -- it's made no tangible difference to the error message, as much as I can see. One per page, and you only get the error at the top of the page, not further down.
However, as I see it, Steve hasn't complained about the server load at any time when our bandwidth indicated we were legitimately using all of those connections (certainly once the quote generator was taken off).
You guys are so hot.
Glad I'm not the only one who was, um, enjoying this.
Make it 4.
I'll just sit here and admire the big brains....
Gives new meaning to "Brrrraaaiiiiinsssss", doesn't it?