[Systems] a.sl.o progress

Bernie Innocenti bernie at codewiz.org
Wed Nov 11 12:51:58 EST 2009

El Wed, 11-11-2009 a las 01:58 -0600, David Farning escribió:
> 1. Individually tune the components.  Because of the numerous systems
> interacting on sunjammer I have been having trouble determining the
> meaning of benchmarks.

There will still be the same amount of interaction if we split the
components to many virtual machines sharing resources on the same host.
It may actually become a little harder to analyze.

On top of this, components that are tightly coupled, such as the
database, the application server and the proxy will suffer a big
performance hit if the communication has to happen over TCP/IP sockets.
Virtual machines are known to pay a high overhead for networking.

Let's measure, but I'm worried that the overhead we're adding might
surpass the benefits of doubling the amount of resources.

> 2. We will be able to move the vms onto seperate physical machines as necessary.
> 3. There is no direct interaction between the aslo cluster and
> sunjammer.  Rather than setting up nfs between download.sl.o and
> sunjammer, I am running rsync every ten minutes.  If sunjammer is
> compromised it will not affect aslo.

Good idea, but how do we get it to work when we have, say, 3 aslo
frontends running concurrently?

If files are never removed or renamed, it may be possible to setup rsync
in both directions.

> So far we have a test instance running at
> .  Below is to do list for the rest
> of the week:)   It looks like it will continue to be a rather
> iterative process.  I hope we can finish setting it up this week.
> Benchmark and test it next week.  And go live the following week.

Good work both of you, and thanks for this nice summary!

For benchmarking, I suggest a simple apachebench (ab) on the front page.

   // Bernie Innocenti - http://codewiz.org/
 \X/  Sugar Labs       - http://sugarlabs.org/

More information about the Systems mailing list