[rt-users] spawn-fcgi crashing, is uWSGI an option?

[Aaron C. de Bruyn]

Thanks Ken.  It's working perfectly.

-A

On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 5:00 PM, ktm at rice.edu <ktm at rice.edu> wrote:
> On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 04:49:00PM -0700, Aaron C. de Bruyn wrote:
>> I have a demo of RT set up for my company.
>>
>> During testing, we found the spawn-fcgi process is slow and crashes often.
>>
>> If more than a few users are on the site, and/or more than few
>> messages coming in through rt-mailgate, the site loads extremely slow.
>> We increased the number of child processes for spawn-fcgi, but it's
>> doesn't seem adequate to handle the load.
>>
>> We can regularly make spawn-fcgi die by simply hitting escape while a
>> page is loading.  Other times it crashes for no apparent reason.
>>
>> We use uWSGI everywhere for python projects we host, and I tried to
>> see if I could get RT working under that.  I failed miserably because
>> I don't know that much about PSGI, FCGI, etc...and their relationship
>> to the webserver.  I know Nginx can speak the uwsgi protocol to talk
>> to uWSGI, but uWSGI seems to bomb on trying to serve RT.
>>
>> I tried the following config to no avail:
>>
>> [uwsgi]
>> plugins = psgi
>> socket = 127.0.0.1:9001
>> psgi = /opt/rt4/sbin/rt-server.fcgi
>> fastcgi-socket = true
>> processes = 2
>> master = true
>> stats = 127.0.0.1:1717
>> chdir = /opt/rt4
>> uid = uitrt
>> gid = uitrt
>>
>> Has anyone else been able to run it using uWSGI?
>>
>> Are there other options for keeping the site running under nginx?
>>
>> Thanks in advance for any pointers or advice.
>>
>> -A
>>
> Hi Aaron,
>
> We run RT with spawn-fcgi/nginx and either systemd/RHEL7 or
> multiwatch/RHEL6 to make sure that the pool stays populated. No
> problems at all. I would take uWSGI out of the mix, although there
> is no reason it should not work, there may be some nuances involved.
> The fact that the site loads slowly seems to indicate that you are
> having a problem with your database backend. Check out your slow
> queries and see what is wrong. It should be pretty zippy by default.
>
> Regards,
> Ken