[Labs-l] ram

[Petr Bena]

OK, let me know when you create the 1gb ram, 10gb / and I would set up a
bunch of web servers for deployment, because the current configuration we
have is getting over loaded, or perhaps 512 mb ram, 5 gb / would be enough

On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 6:31 PM, Ryan Lane <rlane32 at gmail.com> wrote:

> A size between tiny and small would likely be good. The compute nodes
> we are eventually moving to have some incredibly high amount of ram
> though, so I don't think we should worry too much about it.
>
> The storage space I'm not too worried about. I'm more than happy with
> us over allocating storage, as we can just track usage over time.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jan 27, 2012, at 1:24 AM, Petr Bena <benapetr at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have checked the instances and found out that we have approximately
> 50% of all allocated ram unused
> >
> > I think it would make sense to add 2 additional types:
> >
> > - with 1gb of ram and 10gb of storage mounted as /
> > - with 2 gb of ram and 80gb or storage as /mnt and 10 gb of storage as /
> >
> > I think people should use tiny more, but current tiny is too small,
> especially storage is. What do you think? Maybe it would help us utilize
> resources better. There are too many instances which are not using even 10%
> of allocated space, most of them don't use /mnt at all
> > _______________________________________________
> > Labs-l mailing list
> > Labs-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/labs-l
>
> _______________________________________________
> Labs-l mailing list
> Labs-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/labs-l
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/labs-l/attachments/20120130/9cb901c7/attachment.html>