|
On Thursday 21 June 2007 09:39, Malcolm wrote:
> Rio,
> > If so, is there a 'best model'? I suspect the NAT model would be what we
need.
> >
> Or do the NAT on your firewall and use DR.
will research that.
> > The control box would be a 2 processor dual-core opteron so it effectively
> > would have 4 processors and maybe 8gb or more ram.
> >
> Good grief! Why not just use 2 servers P4, 1GB RAM (or less) control
> boxes as a high availability pair?
i found out from another message that the director does not need a lot of
horsepower, so I will plan on two single processor 1G ram machines which will
handle enough connections for a long time before they need upgrading and then
it will just be more ram or a second processor. heh they will probably turn
to dust before they need updating anyway :)
> > Do you think we could get away with one 'control' box considering the
> > bandwidth usage? All internal networks are gigabit. If needed we can
easily
> > feed the control box via more than one 'public' interface separated by
> > networks.
> >
> DR yes, NAT probably you said 70GB/mo each? doesn't sound a lot and
> doesn't mean much how many GB/s & connections/s?
> >
i was referring to a few of the more busy websites. generally our fastE
internet connection averages a continuous 5 to 7 MB/s, 24/7 with lots of
peaks from there, some as high as 20MB/s. abouit 70% of this comes from
services, the rest from dedicated connections. we consider the average just
mentioned the 'background noise' that we count from :)
> > Once I have some guidelines, I will know where/how to study and begin
> > implementation/testing. At this moment I am ignorant of clustering
> > technology, I only have an idea what I want to do.
> >
> >
> Always a good way to start.
>
> Regards,
> Malcolm.
>
> _______________________________________________
> LinuxVirtualServer.org mailing list - lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Send requests to lvs-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> or go to http://lists.graemef.net/mailman/listinfo/lvs-users
>
--
Rio
|
