On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 03:31:00PM +0100, Gabriel Wicke wrote:
On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 15:11:09 +0100, Jens Frank wrote:
2*80G 7.2kRPM, 8MB cache SATA drives
Looking at pliny and larousse, from the numbers I've been told, their disks are highly busy, bi and bo are very high in vmstat.
This should be the current cache- it could be switched off once the Squids are working. I even don't see a need for Apache logging- the logging is done on the Squids. The only potentially disk-accessing operation would be serving images which will get picked up by the squids as well.
Agreed.
My proposal for the Apaches is heaps of Cpu, single ordinary drive and enough memory to prevent any swapping. And some more of them. We don't need high reliability as long as we have enough of them.
Jimbo, how much rackspace can we use?
You'd need heartbeat for the load balancers, anyway. Doing it on the squids would just save two boxes.
Why three squids? Two would be enough, and even one should be able to handle the load if the other one fails.
+1
Plus one box or plus one who thinks the same?
JeLuF