On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 13:13:58 +0100, Jens Frank wrote:
In the office, we ran a website using DNS RR. It was about 500,000 hits per day and 52% of the request hit the "first" server, 48% the second. We changed to HW load balancers recently since the number of web servers increased.
The default configuration for using Linux Director would be no load balancing at all and one machine on standby with Heartbeat. We could do the same with the squids, but it makes more sense to use both machine's ram.
2*36G 15kRPM SCSI Disks
If money was short i'd propose to buy 4Gb ram and see how much money is left for a fancy hd. I theory the hd should be used only for booting and logging. It might make sense to go single-processor 64bit for the Squids- not for cpu, but for future memory expansion. I think Raid isn't necessary for the squid if the logging is done to a separate disk.
Regarding CPU size: http://web.archive.org/web/20030605225127/hermes.wwwcache.ja.net/servers/squ... states that a dual Ultra Sparc at 170 MHz was able to process 1.8 million of requests per day. This is roughly the current load of en:. A 2 GHz x86 CPU beats the Sparc by far. If we want to spend more money on the box, add memory.
Agree completely. My Celeron 2Ghz does about 700 html requests/second at 54% cpu (siege load tester taking up the rest). That's 60.2 million requests per day.
Gabriel Wicke