trafficserver-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Adam W. Dace" <colonelforbi...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: ATS Storage Question
Date Fri, 18 Oct 2013 16:40:23 GMT
Yeah, I'm not trying to debate that filesystem is faster than raw disk.
It's just not really an option for me.
Heck, one of the caches I'm running is completely virtualized.  Sorry, no
raw disk there.

That's why I'm asking about files...did your testing have anything to say
about one file versus many?


On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 11:37 AM, Johan Caripson <johan@director.se> wrote:

> I have done lots of test.
> Go for raw instead!
>
> Now with raw i can push 20 Gbit/s
> From a single sever with fusion-io drive. With storage files we "only"
> manage to push around 11 Gbit/s
>
> We use 900GB cache storage
>
> Johan Carlsson
>
>
> 2013/10/18 Adam W. Dace <colonelforbin74@gmail.com>
>
> I've already noticed ATS tends to slow down a bit when using database
>> files above 2GB...but it got me thinking.
>>
>> Does anyone know which would be more efficient: 2 database files at 2GB
>> each...or 4 database files at 1GB each?
>>
>> Thanks In Advance,
>>
>> --
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> Adam W. Dace <colonelforbin74@gmail.com>
>>
>> Phone: (815) 355-5848
>> Instant Messenger: AIM & Yahoo! IM - colonelforbin74 | ICQ - #39374451
>> Microsoft Messenger - colonelforbin74@live.com <adam@turing.com>
>>
>> Google Profile: https://plus.google.com/u/0/109309036874332290399/about
>>
>
>


-- 
____________________________________________________________
Adam W. Dace <colonelforbin74@gmail.com>

Phone: (815) 355-5848
Instant Messenger: AIM & Yahoo! IM - colonelforbin74 | ICQ - #39374451
Microsoft Messenger - colonelforbin74@live.com <adam@turing.com>

Google Profile: https://plus.google.com/u/0/109309036874332290399/about

Mime
View raw message