Re: Best configuration for bcache/md cache or other cache using ssd

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Well the internet link here is 100mbps, i think the workload will be a
bit more than only 100 users, it's a second webserver+database server
He is trying to use a cheaper server with more disk performace, Brazil
costs are too high to allow a full ssd system or 15k rpm sas harddisks
For mariadb server i'm studing if the thread-pool scheduler will be
used instead of one thread per connection but "it's not my problem"
the final user will select what is better for database scheduler
In other words i think the work load will not be a simple web server
cms/blog, i don't know yet how it will work, it's a black/gray box to
me, today he have sata enterprise hdd 7200rpm at servers (dell server
r420 if i'm not wrong) and is studing if a ssd could help, that's my
'job' (hobby) in this task

2013/9/18 Drew <drew.kay@xxxxxxxxx>:
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 8:51 AM, Roberto Spadim <roberto@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Sorry guys, this time i don't have a full knowledge about the
>> workload, but from what he told me, he want fast writes with hdd but i
>> could check if small ssd devices could help
>> After install linux with raid1 i will install apache mariadb and php
>> at this machine, in other words it's a database and web server load,
>> but i don't know what size of app and database will run yet
>>
>> Btw, ssd with bcache or dm cache could help hdd (this must be
>> enterprise level) writes, right?
>> Any idea what the best method to test what kernel drive could give
>> superior performace? I'm thinking about install the bcache, and after
>> make a backup and install dm cache and check what's better, any other
>> idea?
>
> We still need to know what size datasets are going to be used. And
> also given it's a webserver, how big of a pipe does he have?
>
> Given a typical webserver in a colo w/ 10Mbps pipe, I think the
> suggested config is overkill. For a webserver the 7200 SATA's should
> be able to deliver enough data to keep apache happy.
>
> In the database side, depends on how intensive the workload is. I see
> a lot of webservers where the 7200's are just fine because the I/O
> demands from the database are low. Blog/CMS systems like wordpress
> will be harder on the database but again it depends on how heavy the
> access is to the server. How many visitors/hour does he expect to
> serve?
>
>
> --
> Drew
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



-- 
Roberto Spadim
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Linux RAID Wiki]     [ATA RAID]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Linux Block]     [Linux IDE]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux Hams]     [Device Mapper]     [Device Mapper Cryptographics]     [Kernel]     [Linux Admin]     [Linux Net]     [GFS]     [RPM]     [git]     [Yosemite Forum]


  Powered by Linux