[mapserver-users] speed performance question

[imap at chesapeake.net]

joe,

performance can be a problem if you have a ton of concurrent users...
what we do for our applications is load balance tween 3-4 machines,
and our normal load is about about 25k-30k map images per day/per CPU
using resonably fast processors and fast/wide scsi and/or raid.  some
of machines are stronger than others, but the load balancing takes care
of the issue.  once you get above a certain threshold the machine response
lags pretty bad, so you need to be able to scale the machines as the
concurrent load increases.  that configuration uses the rack mounted Dell
machines (last years model) running RedHat linux which seemed to be
a pretty good bang for the buck, although you could probably get away
with a cheaper/faster configuration.  At the time we bought these
machines, state-of-the-art was still below the 1Ghz milestone, so things 
may have changed.  It keeps getting better...

I have also tested on a 8 processor SGI Challege XL (about 3-4 yrs old)
and that machine was doing about 125k-150k per day and pretty much consumed
the machine.  This config was not as flexiable or cost effective as the
cheap PCs.  I seem to recall the IO became saturated somewhere around 4 
processors... so if you go this route, you may have to design some kinda
redundant storage technique..  I never could get the level of performance
I expected from the big machine.

My recommendation to anyone building a large system is to use rack mounted
(pizza box) PCs w/fast scsi disk on linux (I am biased)... and to stay
away from the monolithic architecture.

Regards,

Chris Stuber (mapsurfer)

Joe Bussell wrote:
> 
> Greetings,
>     What is the real story on hardware requirements?  Is anyone putting
> mapserver through heavy load tests?  I have read two threads in the
> mailing list archives requesting the same.  There are no replies.
> 
>    Any information would be helpful.
> 
> Cordially,
> 
> Joe Bussell
> On Time Systems