From owner-freebsd-chat Sat Oct 24 23:23:08 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA11427 for freebsd-chat-outgoing; Sat, 24 Oct 1998 23:23:08 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from implode.root.com (implode.root.com [198.145.90.17]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id XAA11422 for ; Sat, 24 Oct 1998 23:23:06 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from xroot@implode.root.com) Received: from implode.root.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by implode.root.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id XAA14829; Sat, 24 Oct 1998 23:23:34 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199810250623.XAA14829@implode.root.com> To: John Cavanaugh cc: chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: another record In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 24 Oct 1998 22:26:52 PDT." <199810250526.WAA17958@bang.rain.com> From: David Greenman Reply-To: dg@root.com Date: Sat, 24 Oct 1998 23:23:33 -0700 Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org >Either way - that will be even more impressive. So, if we went specifically >with the math from above, those 10000 users would be able to fill up about >3 100Mbps circuts. Would the Xeon be able to fill all of those pipes? >(I guess you wouldn't be considering it if it wouldn't now would you? ;-)) Yes, I think 250-300Mbps of bandwidth will be needed to support 10000 users. As things are right now with my current set of performance improvements, I'd say that the Xeon/400 should be able to support around 7500 users. I have some additional improvements planned which will take as far past 10000 users, but I don't want to make any precise guesses until I've done the work and benchmarked the results. >Is the plan to just keep growing wcarchive to meet demand or maybe split >the duties across multiple machines? I'd like to keep it as a single machine. The whole idea is to show people how far FreeBSD can scale and how well it works on (relatively) inexpensive hardware. Our ISP would very much like us to put another server on the east coast, however, in order to better balance the traffic loads. I don't really want to do that until the physical limits of the hardware have been reached. >Looking at the stats that you've posted recently, it looks like the >FreeBSD directories always get a lot of traffic, but when some new >first person shooter (or in this case, 3rd person shooter - Heretic II), >comes out, those directories traffic goes through the roof. Do you >think it would be better to carve off certain sections of the main archive >for bandwidth reasons? > >What solution do you think is the best? Thanks. I'm not sure what we're going to do about the games demos. It really bothers me that game companies are getting so much of our bandwidth to promote their products, while leaving WC CDROM to pay the bill. -DG David Greenman Co-founder/Principal Architect, The FreeBSD Project To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message