Apache 2.0.49 - Any cons?

[Cynthia]

We have had some server load problems recently and have taken steps to address it. One suggestion has been that we upgrade to Apache 2.0.49 I read a thread here posted back in November that discussed a few problems with Apache 2.0.49 but nothing since. Anyone have any input on whether upgrading would be beneficial? Are there any problems noted with this new version and vB?

[Zachery]

Well what version of apache are you running now? if your running an older version of apache 2 it would probaly be a good move to update to newest build of it. That im aware of there are no bugs with vB3 and apache 2, there is one setting that needs to be changed for the archive to work, but its nothing major

[Cynthia]

Currently running 1.3.29

[Zachery]

Eva would be best to comment on this :) <waits for server god to arraive>

[Scott MacVicar]

Apache 2 has its advantages mainly as you get 2 apache processes running instead of the potentially hundreds you could get with Apache 1.

[eva2000]

my experience with Apache2 is very limited, but as Scott says it is better than Apache 1.3.29

Unfortunately, Cynthia your problems aren't mainly to do with Apache as I have explained in support tickets and on the forums. MySQL database backups of very large sizes will take ALOT of time and server resources to complete particularly if both web and mysql server processes reside on the same server.

To illustrate vB3 forum with 1.6GB sized mysql database

1. on P4 2.8C/SB61G2/1GB PC3500 ram dual channel with 120GB IDE drive with Win2k PRO local computer running Apache 1.3.29, MySQL 4.0.18 and PHP 4.34 as ISAPI module with nothing else running in windows takes 15-45 mins to backup via mysqldump --opt

2. on Dual AthlonMP 2400+/2GB ram reg ecc, 2x 18GB SCSI disk and RH 7.3, Apache 1.3.29, PHP 4.3.4 and MySQL 4.0.18 takes 15-25mins to backup via mysqldump --opt command with cpu load average around 6.5-12 while still having server accomodate 350-400k visitors/month

3. on 2 server setup where both web and mysql database servers are Dual P4 3.06ghz XEON, 2GB ram with 3x SCSI raid5 array with Apache 1.3.29, PHP 4.3.3 and MySQL 4.0.17, i do backup on the mysql server takes 3-7mins and cpu load average around 1-2.5 while still having 1,500 vb users online on 2 vB forums

As you can see the progression

[Cynthia]

We are considering separating the two which I am understanding would resolve much of our problem. But having read that earlier thread about the new version of Apache I had concerns and wanted to make sure it would be a positive step to upgrade and not create yet another issue somewhere else. Thanks for your input George. :)

[eva2000]

no probs.. i did edit my above reply with example to illustrate my point from my personal experience

[Cynthia]

That's a considerable difference.

Our backup situation was practically shutting the functionality of our forums down for about three hours. If we could cut that down to an hour or less that would be superb!

[Scott MacVicar]

George what about seting up a slave server?
You could just lockup the slave server for a few hours when doing a backup?

Or alternatively backup particular tables rather than the entire database.

[eva2000]

Slave as in mysql replication ? you could but mysql binary logging can be really server intensive as well would be better having the 2nd server as mysql database server than to have it as slave. Or do you mean having 3 servers ? 1 web, 1 mysql database and 1 slave mysql db server ?

Yeah backing up individual tables and excluding some would be good, i.e searchindex/postindex but problem is with large >1+ GB databases it usually means they have alot of posts, enough to cause problems with reindexing search without a shell script to do the job :)

[legolas]

I could not get apache2 worker-MPM to run at all with turck mmcache, even with php compiled with ZTS enabled.

Run apache2 prefork and you shouldn't have any problems. Or if you don't use a cache, you might be able to get away with the worker MPM, but does anyone know if libgd is threadsafe?

[kerplunk]

my experience with Apache2 is very limited, but as Scott says it is better than Apache 1.3.29

Unfortunately, Cynthia your problems aren't mainly to do with Apache as I have explained in support tickets and on the forums. MySQL database backups of very large sizes will take ALOT of time and server resources to complete particularly if both web and mysql server processes reside on the same server.

To illustrate vB3 forum with 1.6GB sized mysql database

1. on P4 2.8C/SB61G2/1GB PC3500 ram dual channel with 120GB IDE drive with Win2k PRO local computer running Apache 1.3.29, MySQL 4.0.18 and PHP 4.34 as ISAPI module with nothing else running in windows takes 15-45 mins to backup via mysqldump --opt

2. on Dual AthlonMP 2400+/2GB ram reg ecc, 2x 18GB SCSI disk and RH 7.3, Apache 1.3.29, PHP 4.3.4 and MySQL 4.0.18 takes 15-25mins to backup via mysqldump --opt command with cpu load average around 6.5-12 while still having server accomodate 350-400k visitors/month

3. on 2 server setup where both web and mysql database servers are Dual P4 3.06ghz XEON, 2GB ram with 3x SCSI raid5 array with Apache 1.3.29, PHP 4.3.3 and MySQL 4.0.17, i do backup on the mysql server takes 3-7mins and cpu load average around 1-2.5 while still having 1,500 vb users online on 2 vB forums

As you can see the progression
For the record, there is no such thing as a "P4 XEON" processor. It is Intel Xeon or Intel Pentium 4. I've noticed you have used "P4 XEON" in a few of your posts and just wanted to correct you from future use.

[Shining Arcanine]

For the record, there is no such thing as a "P4 XEON" processor. It is Intel Xeon or Intel Pentium 4. I've noticed you have used "P4 XEON" in a few of your posts and just wanted to correct you from future use.
Yeah there is. The P4 Xeon is the Xeon that is based on the P4. The P3 Xeon is the Xeon based on the P3.

[eva2000]

Yeah there is. The P4 Xeon is the Xeon that is based on the P4. The P3 Xeon is the Xeon based on the P3.
exactly, while Intel refers to Intel Xeon, there is a distinction between P3 XEON vs P4 XEON processors I'm trying to maintain.

[Zachery]

Yeap, just like theres a P4 Celery and a P3 Celery :P