Gentoo Archives: gentoo-mirrors

From: Rob Baxter <burn@××××××.ca>
To: gentoo-mirrors@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-mirrors] Configuration Request
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 12:47:49
Message-Id: 41AF0F05.1020505@gentoo.ca
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-mirrors] Configuration Request by Georgi Georgiev
i don't have any official numbers, as i don't run any of the master mirrors, and never bothered to 
test it out. i manage 2 here in canada though, and friend manages a 3rd, all 3 are running from 
ramdisk, you're welcome to try them out for yourself if you wish. rsync4, rsync5, & 
rsync9.ca.gentoo.org.

i noticed an instant jump in the speed when i moved my mirror from u160 scsi to ramdisk, it does 
make sense if you think about it. you're serving roughly 100k tiny files to a bunch of people all at 
once. that's a lot of seek time on any hard disk. i also sync the ramdisk every 30 mins directly to 
ram. basically, it's a lot less disk thrashing. ;)

rob

Georgi Georgiev wrote:
> maillog: 01/12/2004-16:30:40(-0700): Rob Baxter types > >>i think the point is that the data that gets cached can and does change >>every 30 minutes, so caching doesn't really help. > > > It does help. If data changes, it is first updated in the cache. New > data is served directly out of the cache, while the hard disk is synced > in the background. That's unless I am majorly mistaken about how caching > works. > > >>all 5 servers in the rsync.gentoo.org rotation are currently running >>rsync out of ram. i think i can safely say they wouldn't be nearly as >>fast as they are, running off a hard disk. > > > Do you have some real numbers? I am not trying to doubt you too much. I > am genuinely curious how big the speedup is and if it is worth the > effort. All I wanted to point in my post is that the speedup is probably > not that great, but I'd really like to see benchmark numbers if someone > went to the trouble of doing it. > > >>besides, ram is cheap > > > That's pretty relative. $70 for 512MB is not cheap for me. One reason > why my poor "server" is still running with 2x512MB *PC133*. > > >>and has a small footprint (smaller blocks) using >>ramdrive, why not use it. > > > Well, you may be right. I guess I could try serving two trees and do > some tests myself. >
-- gentoo-mirrors@g.o mailing list