6 ms·

Site down?

• syllogism 9y ago
  It's a 100% static site, but Apache is still struggling :(. Should have used a bigger droplet...Sorry!
  • rubatuga 9y ago
    Should have used nginx, or at least put cloudflare in front of it
  • deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  • carbocation 9y ago
    Turn off KeepAlive, if it's on.
    • user5994461 9y ago
      Bad advice. That's likely to make it a lot worse.
      • carbocation 9y ago
        I disagree with you based on experience, but you don't have to take my word for it. 'patio11 also has had some experience here: http://www.kalzumeus.com/2010/06/19/running-apache-on-a-memory-constrained-vps/ http://www.kalzumeus.com/2010/06/19/running-apache-on-a-memo...
        • user5994461 9y ago
          Also disagree with you based on experience ;) patio11 blog is HTTP only but this blog is HTTPS. HTTPS without keepalive is likely to kill any cheap VPS, establishing HTTPS connection is intensive. That being said, the core of the issue is that they should use nginx (or apache in mpm-events). And they should have cloudflare.
          • carbocation 9y ago
            I guess we're going to just wait here until OP delivers the answer for why the machine couldn't answer enough requests :)
          • patio11 9y ago
            establishing HTTPS connection is intensive More intensive than adding numbers together, sure, but computers are pretty fast. If you're doing 100k connections a second you might have to give some thought to that. Meanwhile, if you have KeepAlive on, 2~5 clients per second will kill you.
  • the_cat_kittles 9y ago
    you can always just use an s3 bucket