Our web hosting company just went out of business. We have a server humming away with 249 days of uptime and counting. Unfortunately, the door to the office is locked, so we can't get it to our new hosting partner. The power and net connection are still on, so everything's fine for now, but I suspect we may need to get a new server very soon. We run Debian Linux and want a 1U server. Our current server is a 1GHz PIII with 512MB SDRAM & a pair of mirrored 40 GB drives. It's fast enough right now, but starting to slow down.
From recent discussions, it appears that Zope doesn't benefit much from a dual processor system, but it does benefit from higher clock rates and more RAM. So should I invest in a faster single-proc system with a couple of gigs of RAM, or go with a slower dual-proc box?
Can I assume that raw pystone measurements will correlate well to Zope performance? Intel or AMD? I love building my own PCs from parts. Is this feasable for a 1U server? Thanks for your help! Howard Hansen http://howardsmusings.com
Hi Howard & All, I'm in a similar predicament, albeit not so urgent. I'm looking at APPRO (http://appro.com/) 1RU dual Athlon servers. (Available from Emagen (http://emagen.com.au/) for purchases in Australia). My Zope installations typically use external processes like MySQL, HTMLDOC, apache/ssl, sendmail, etc., so the second CPU is useful as overflow in crunch situations. -- David Hart Atlantis Blue Pty Ltd On Sun, 2002-09-15 at 17:22, Howard Hansen wrote: [snip] From recent discussions, it appears that Zope doesn't benefit much from a dual processor system, but it does benefit from higher clock rates and more RAM. So should I invest in a faster single-proc system with a couple of gigs of RAM, or go with a slower dual-proc box?
imeme.net did not fare that well. they vowed never to use AMD processors again. in their setup (using FreeBSD with individual accounts in "jails") the machine tended to crash for no apparent reason, something they never saw on the intel boxes. of course none of the evidence can be said to point directly to the processor as the problem, but they followed a path of least risk, just to make sure. jens On Sunday, Sep 15, 2002, at 04:28 US/Eastern, Stephan Goeldi wrote:
Intel or AMD?
The Anti-AMD people only came up with some myths until now. I never saw real numbers. www.zopehosting.ch runs very well with AMD.
Oh my gosh, there's anti AMD people? lol ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stephan Goeldi" <goeldi@goeldi.com> To: "Howard Hansen" <zope@halfmagic.com>; <zope@zope.org> Sent: Sunday, September 15, 2002 4:28 AM Subject: Re: [Zope] New server recommendations
Intel or AMD?
The Anti-AMD people only came up with some myths until now. I never saw real numbers. www.zopehosting.ch runs very well with AMD.
_______________________________________________ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
-----Original Message----- From: zope-admin@zope.org [mailto:zope-admin@zope.org]On Behalf Of Stephan Goeldi Sent: Monday, September 16, 2002 10:14 PM To: working4aliving; Howard Hansen; zope@zope.org Subject: Re: [Zope] New server recommendations
Oh my gosh, there's anti AMD people?
The Anti-AMD people only came up with some myths until now.
How would you call them?
I think they're called "Intel employees."
Oh my gosh, there's anti AMD people?
The Anti-AMD people only came up with some myths until now.
How would you call them?
I don't know, it sound pretty psychotic... so I'd probably call them Mr., or Ms. :)
_______________________________________________ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
Howard Hansen wrote:
From recent discussions, it appears that Zope doesn't benefit much from a dual processor system, but it does benefit from higher clock rates and more RAM. So should I invest in a faster single-proc system with a couple of gigs of RAM, or go with a slower dual-proc box?
I wouldn't state it this way. From what I read from various posts, there's a subtle difference to what you said. - A system which has more daemon processes running than zope (likely) can profit from multiprocessor configs, because the processes will spread across processors. - There is a problem with mulitproc configs when the zope process wanders between procs (cache coherency and whatnot), so the os having the possibitilty to restrict process to single processors is a big advantage. cheers, oliver
Thanks for the clarification. I had noted that Apache, Postgres, etc. could use the other proc, but when I watch top running on the system, I see Zope at the top 95% of the time, the Apache front end putters along at 1-2%, and Postgres blips up to 3% every few minutes. The top process uses a lot more cycles than either of the non-Zope daemons. I don't expect this to change much, which I why I lean towards 1 proc. When I'm looking at systems, does Zope performance correlate well with the pystone benchmark? H ----- Original Message ----- From: "Oliver Bleutgen" <myzope@gmx.net> To: "Howard Hansen" <zope@halfmagic.com> Cc: <zope@zope.org> Sent: Sunday, September 15, 2002 3:15 AM Subject: Re: [Zope] New server recommendations
Howard Hansen wrote:
From recent discussions, it appears that Zope doesn't benefit much from a dual processor system, but it does benefit from higher clock rates and more RAM. So should I invest in a faster single-proc system with a couple of gigs of RAM, or go with a slower dual-proc box?
I wouldn't state it this way. From what I read from various posts, there's a subtle difference to what you said.
- A system which has more daemon processes running than zope (likely) can profit from multiprocessor configs, because the processes will spread across processors.
- There is a problem with mulitproc configs when the zope process wanders between procs (cache coherency and whatnot), so the os having the possibitilty to restrict process to single processors is a big advantage.
cheers, oliver
Howard Hansen wrote:
Thanks for the clarification. I had noted that Apache, Postgres, etc. could use the other proc, but when I watch top running on the system, I see Zope at the top 95% of the time, the Apache front end putters along at 1-2%, and Postgres blips up to 3% every few minutes. The top process uses a lot more cycles than either of the non-Zope daemons. I don't expect this to change much, which I why I lean towards 1 proc.
Well, but if you have more than one zope running on a server ... Note that this also can be achieved using one or more ZEO clients on the same server, bounding them each to their own processor.
When I'm looking at systems, does Zope performance correlate well with the pystone benchmark?
According to Matt Kromer from Zope Corp. it does, see e.g. http://mail.python.org/pipermail/zope/2002-February/109354.html cheers, oliver
participants (7)
-
Charlie Reiman -
David Hart -
Howard Hansen -
Jens Vagelpohl -
Oliver Bleutgen -
Stephan Goeldi -
working4aliving