As far as multiprocessing goes, if I were to run a MySQL database on the same server (serving primarily to Zope) then the multiprocessor config would be a very big performance boost wouldn't it? What about Memory? Again with MySQL. I suppose I should have mentioned it right of. Our main goal is to serve up pages from a database that will be about 500MB-1GB in size. There will be very little information which will be cachable, almost all of the queries are unique. Johan Carlsson wrote:
Beyond that, what do you suggest. Is memory more important than processor speed? Is it important to go with a Multi-processor server or will Zope/Linux take advantage of a multi processor setup?
Zope, more correctly Python will not take advantage of a dual processor.
Yes it will, it just won't scale exactly two fold. In almost all Python wrapped C calls, the C code releases the interpeter lock as often as possible, this allways happens, for example, when doing I/O or when calling database library routines. Two processors will give you a noticable benefit. Four or more will probably not. Further, Zope will not be the only process running, so a dual gives you the usual benefits, like doing a compile on one thing without killing your website.
I probably seriously consider buying a ZEO solution from DC. I don't know, but a ZEO solution might solve the problem with 100 continuous concurrent users writing to the ZODB?
ZODB FileStorage was not designed to be write intensive, the goal is to provide a mid-write high-read solution, this solution satisfies 99.9% of all web site needs. You would be surprised how much money you have to pay to Oracle to get, for example, their high write-write distributed database solutions (its in the six figures). ZEO is a distributed storage, but in the end it depends on a mechanism that actual writes the data somewhere. In the stock case, this is a FileStorage. If you want high-write intensity, consider a BerkeleyStorage (which works fine as the backend for ZEO) or offload alot of your high-write intensive data to a relational database. -Michel
Here is my take on it: - Never have something high-volume-write to ZODB. - Use RDBs and LocalFS or other ports to write to the File System. - If you really need to large data in Zope format look at plugable brains, the idea is great. - I noticed PCGI and Apache increases your performance, especially when you serve up big files. Setup: Apache using virtual hosts HTTP & HTTPS running Zope PCGI, for Images and for large files. My Images are served using port 81 and Documents using port 82. That worked very well so far. We still have to test it live. - I have two servers running: One for the DB and one for the rest: Mail, HTTP/HTTPS, Zope, SSH ... - Even though not much is going on, the Web server has a constant use of 400 MB RAM (so I would suggest 512 MB RAM) - The DB server should be your real performance working horse. Buy a computer that will reflect your DB load...get a lot of memory though (1-2 GB). - Put in both servers a dedicated NIC only for the DB info transfer. I think that will get you going pretty well. For the Web server Processor power maybe more important than for the DB server. That completely depends on how much you team likes SQL (meaning, how much logic is done using SQL). Regards, Stephan -- Stephan Richter - (901) 573-3308 - srichter@cbu.edu CBU - Physics & Chemistry; Framework Web - Web Design & Development PGP Key: 735E C61E 5C64 F430 4F9C 798E DCA2 07E3 E42B 5391
On Tue, 21 Mar 2000, Stephan Richter wrote: :Here is my take on it: : [snip] :- I noticed PCGI and Apache increases your performance, especially when you :serve up big files. : Setup: Apache using virtual hosts HTTP & HTTPS running Zope PCGI, for :Images and for large files. : My Images are served using port 81 and Documents using port :82. That worked very well so far. We still have to test it live. stephan, i agree on apache increasing your performance when serving static files (for instance images), but wouldn't url rewriting and the proxy pass module of apache be an even better solution? i just switched from PCGI to the Rewrite/Proxypass combo because of the additional overhead of PCGI. (see http://www.zope.org/Members/anser/apache_zserver/ for the kind of setup i think of). regards, peter. -- _________________________________________________ peter sabaini, mailto: sabaini@niil.at -------------------------------------------------
participants (3)
-
Baker, Dennis (sjmr) -
Peter Sabaini -
Stephan Richter