Another Question: 1 proxyd = 1 client connection ? Or 1 proxyd handles several connections ? This parameter can be configured ? Any metric to sizing IO Use for frontends and backends ?? Regards On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 2:48 PM, Andrew Morgan <morgan@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, 22 Jun 2010, Lucas Zinato Carraro wrote: > >> Thanks for all answers, >> >> " As Wes points out, proxyd process churn is relatively expensive." >> >> Any metric to "sizing" a solution ? >> ex: proxyd memory and cpu by connection >> >> I expect "20.000" simultaneous connections in frontends ( 3 or 5 >> machines ) >> 10.000 using IMAPs and 10.000 using IMAP. >> >> An maximum attachment set to 10 Mb. > > We have 3 frontend servers here, each with 2 dual-core AMD 280 cpus and 4GB > of RAM. > > Our peak usage was about 4500 proxyd processes (1500 per server). These are > a mix of IMAP and IMAPS (I don't know the breakdown). During those peak > times, the load average was around 0.6 to 0.8. Right now there are > 800 proxyd processes consuming about 1GB of RAM. There is almost zero > memory used by proxyd that is not shared memory. > > If I had to guess at the peak capacity of my frontend servers, I'd say we > could handle about 2000 proxyd processes each. > > Today, you could buy an 8 core, 8GB server and handle double the number of > processes. For your requirements, I'd buy 5 or 6 of those servers. > > Andy > ---- Cyrus Home Page: http://cyrusimap.web.cmu.edu/ Cyrus Wiki/FAQ: http://cyrusimap.web.cmu.edu/twiki List Archives/Info: http://asg.web.cmu.edu/cyrus/mailing-list.html
