Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 12:34:28 -0800 From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net> To: "Michael C . Wu" <keichii@peorth.iteration.net> Cc: fs@FreeBSD.ORG, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: tuning a VERY heavily (30.0) loaded s cerver Message-ID: <20010322123428.D9431@fw.wintelcom.net> In-Reply-To: <20010322142852.A19619@peorth.iteration.net>; from keichii@iteration.net on Thu, Mar 22, 2001 at 02:28:52PM -0600 References: <200103211114.f2LBE0h57371@mobile.wemm.org> <Pine.LNX.4.21.0103211328310.9056-100000@imladris.rielhome.conectiva> <20010321120620.A932@peorth.iteration.net> <200103211817.f2LIHR416007@earth.backplane.com> <20010321102836.N12319@fw.wintelcom.net> <200103211907.f2LJ7cp17933@earth.backplane.com> <20010322142852.A19619@peorth.iteration.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Michael C . Wu <keichii@iteration.net> [010322 12:29] wrote: > Just an update on the lovely loaded BBS server. > We made our record-breaking number of users last night. > > After implementing the changes suggested, and kqueue'ifying > the BBS daemon. We saw a dramatic increase in server power. > > Top number of users was 4704 users. Serving SSH, HTTP, SMTP, innd, BBSD > with no delays. (Meanwhile, we had kernel profiling ON :) ) > We had peak load averages of 100.0, read: no delay. I am certain > that we could taken on 6000 users had we had that many users. > (It died due to unrelated reason, not because of the load since the > number of users had gone down to 4400.) iostat became a fraction of what > it used to be before we set vfs.vmiodirenable=1. > > (Why is vfs.vmiodirenable=1 not enabled by default?) It's not a good thing for boxes with < 128megs of ram IMO. It wastes a bunch of ram. When I get a chance I'm going to look at having FreeBSD auto tune such things as maxusers and things like vfs.vmiodirenable for large installs. Actually, i'm tempted to change the defaults for large installs then leave the "optimizations" for small machines to the people who have small machines. :) > We used to die at about 4200 users with average loads of 200.0 even 300.0 > For those still interested in kq'ed BBSD stats: > http://zoo.ee.ntu.edu.tw/~keichii > > I'm ponder if this should have been posted to FreeBSD-Advocacy. :^) Why not write up an article about this BBS scene and get it posted to slashdot or daemonnews? It would really make good press: "FreeBSD community responds to BBS problem with spectacular results." or something. :) -- -Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org] Instead of asking why a piece of software is using "1970s technology," start asking why software is ignoring 30 years of accumulated wisdom. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010322123428.D9431>