|
Hey Rajiv,
> Johan,
> "In a dedicated database setup we have big problems running over 500
> connections to MySQL."
>
> You shouldn't have a problem with this... MySQL can handle well over that
> given a good amount of ram and processing power.
>
> Let me tell you about our setup and hopefully it will help you
> make a better
> decision.
>
> Two LVS directors mon+heartbeat+lvs
> 6 Web Servers (512mb ram + 733 Mhz)
> 2 DB Servers (1 GB ram + 866) in Hot Replication (active/active)
>
> We serve aprox 280 million page views per month off this setup and MySQL
> does avg 1,200 quieries per second.
We've actually tried dedicated db setup on the live enviroment and after
about 500 connectsions we get terrible performance. I'm sure there are ways
to optimize the setup but i'm not convinced that it would gain us more httpd
connections/machine in the end...
All servers have 2x866, 1 Gb RAM and Ultra160 SCSI and we're using MySQL
replication.
But almost all our pageviews are database dependant and they ask pretty
complicated questions too... :P
> About serving static images, there is a web server, khttpd, that can be
> compiled into the kernel to serve static pages. Very efficient.
> Just have
> all your images hosted at images.yourdomain.com or use a different port.
Is "TUX" stable now? I tried it a while ago and it creashed the machine...
> "One scenario could be that the load balancer would look at the
> requests and
> direct all /images/* to the static virtual server. I know that some
> loadbalancers can do that, how about LVS?"
>
> I don't know if LVS can do this but if it can it would require LVS to read
> HTTP request hearders and really slow things down. IMHO no realy point.
I agree that if it would really slow things down it wont be worth it, but it
would
make things much easier for the webmasters/designers if they didn't have to
keep track
of different FTP accounts etc...
Thanks for your comments!
Regards,
Johan Isacsson
MGON
|
