Gentoo Archives: gentoo-mirrors

From: Kurt Lieber <klieber@g.o>
To: gentoo-mirrors@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-mirrors] Configuration Request
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 16:03:06
Message-Id: 20041202160304.GI32117@mail.lieber.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-mirrors] Configuration Request by Georgi Georgiev
1 On Thu, Dec 02, 2004 at 10:55:57AM +0900 or thereabouts, Georgi Georgiev wrote:
2 > > all 5 servers in the rsync.gentoo.org rotation are currently running
3 > > rsync out of ram. i think i can safely say they wouldn't be nearly as
4 > > fast as they are, running off a hard disk.
5 >
6 > Do you have some real numbers? I am not trying to doubt you too much. I
7 > am genuinely curious how big the speedup is and if it is worth the
8 > effort. All I wanted to point in my post is that the speedup is probably
9 > not that great, but I'd really like to see benchmark numbers if someone
10 > went to the trouble of doing it.
11
12 I can't give real comparison numbers, but I can say that we did see
13 dramatic improvements when moving from an IDE drive to a ram drive on the
14 servers in the rsync.g.o rotation. It's a bit hazy, but I seem to recall
15 getting killed with much more than 20 or so simultaneous connections on an
16 IDE-based rsync.g.o server and no more than 30-40 with a SCSI-based one.
17 With the ram-based servers, we've never seen a ceiling. Most of our
18 servers are serving up ~30 simultaneous connections and ~6Mbps on average
19 and their loads never spike much beyond .4 or so.
20
21 Out of the 5 servers we have in the rotation, we could probably make do
22 with 2 of them. The rest are mainly there for spikes during releases and
23 redundancy in case of failure.
24
25 --kurt