[Date Prev] [Date Index] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Index] [Thread Next]
Bryan Stansell bryan@conserver.com
Fri, 30 Jun 2006 16:00:27 -0700 (PDT)
On Fri, Jun 30, 2006 at 03:18:00PM -0500, Travis Campbell wrote: > What's the realistic maximum number of consoles that one conserver > installation can support from one system? well, the flippant answer is that you kinda already answered your own question. having conserver shoot the load to over 200 and be unusable for 10 minutes makes me think there are too many on that instance. one thing that would help, if you haven't done so already, is use the -m option (or --with-maxmemb configure option) to have each conserver process manage more than just 16 consoles. something like 64 is probably a good start. see if that helps things (maybe even go to 96 or 128). it's all a balancing act. but, if you haven't done this yet, it'll bring the process count down by a factor of 4 and should trigger less of a spike. the HUP processing is certainly not ideal. it seems to work decently (a livable, but quite noticable, delay) on a sparc t1 with just over 1000 consoles (using --with-maxmemb=32). that's the only hard datapoint i have beyond yours. with the machine you're talking about, i'd think you *should* be able to support 3500 consoles. i'd love to know if this helps. if not, what is your --with-maxmemb/-m value? (conserver -V shows it) Bryan