[DeleGate-En] Re: Can memory usage be reduced?
Yes I have
I am currently running a pilot where people will be using several
delegate service processes running on an NT4 server. I got the shivers
after looking at the process list when this server is running for
several days, and after piloting a number of 80 people will be accessing
my server; the pilot users are only 10. So yes, I'd like to see this
forking new processes go away!
> Peter Steele wrote:
> I see no one has replied to my posting. Has no one else had memory
> concerns with DeleGate, particularly under NT?
> Peter Steele
> "Peter Steele" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote in message
> > We're considering delegate as a way to provide SSL for our
> > HTTP/XML server. Our server runs on Windows NT so we're using the NT
> > of delegate. The problem we've seen in initial tests is the amount
> of memory
> > delegate consumes. It starts out as a single process taking about a
> > of memory. When we connect to our server using our manangement
> > *nine* instances of the delegate process are spawned as well as
> > instances of sslway. This consumes approx. 10 MB of memory.
> > clients connecting to the server generate additional delegate and
> > processes. Memory would very quickly become exhausted with the
> number of
> > potential client connections we anticipate.
> > For comparison we tried stunnel and it uses very little memory,
> > multithreading and shared DDLs instead of forking. Unfortunately
> > lacks a lot of the functionality of delegate. We need the additional
> > features that delegate provides but its memory usage is a show
> stopper. We
> > considering looking into the code to see how easily we could convert
> it from
> > forking to multithreading. Any comments on how feasible this would
> be? Any
> > other advice on how to reduce delegates memory usage?
> > Peter Steele
> > ONI Systems