RE: IBM HTTP Server

["Stone, Brad V (TC)" <bvstone@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Generally the weak link is the network.  It can't keep up.  You can test
this.  Request a page, watch the CPU, keep hitting F10 until it's down again
to 0.  Is the page on your browser yet?  If not, how long did it take after
the CPU went to 0 to display?

I've seen as much as 5 seconds on our "upgraded" network.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: MEovino@ESTES-EXPRESS.COM [mailto:MEovino@ESTES-EXPRESS.COM]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2000 11:36 AM
> To: MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com
> Subject: IBM HTTP Server
> 
> 
> 
> It had been performing pretty nicely for me up until now.  
> The two specific
> changes we've made recently are:
> 
> 1.  Moving the server from port 8080 to port 80
> 2.  Turning BindSpecific on so it would bind to one IP 
> address (on port
> 80), and binding our Domino HTTP server to another IP address 
> (also on port
> 80)
> 
> It still works, but it's pretty slow at times.  If I look at 
> the active
> jobs for QHTTPSVR, they look like this (set mail reader to fixed width
> fonts for this to make sense):
> 
> Opt  Subsystem/Job  User        Type  CPU %  Function        Status
>      QHTTPSVR       QSYS        SBS      .0                   DEQW
>        DEFAULT      QTMHHTTP    BCH      .2  PGM-QZHBHTTP     CNDW
>        DEFAULT      QTMHHTTP    BCI      .0                   TIMW
>        DEFAULT      QTMHHTTP    BCI      .0                   TIMW
>        DEFAULT      QTMHHTTP    BCI      .0                   TIMW
>        DEFAULT      QTMHHTTP    BCI      .0                   TIMW
>        DEFAULT      QTMHHTTP    BCI      .0                   TIMW
>        DEFAULT      QTMHHTTP    BCI      .0                   TIMW
>        DEFAULT      QTMHHTTP    BCI      .0                   TIMW
> 
> That first job under QHTTPSVR is ALWAYS in CNDW.  I don't 
> remember if this
> used to be the case before the changes.  CPU utilization on the box is
> greatly DECREASED after the changes (generally around 20%), so I don't
> think it's that.
> 
> Anyone have any ideas?
> 
> Mike E.
> 
> +---
> | This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
> | To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
> | To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
> | To unsubscribe from this list send email to 
> MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
> | Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: 
> david@midrange.com
> +---
> 
+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---