Jure and Marlon,<br><br><br>Here are some more informations which might give some more insights.<br><br>The current system looks like this<br><br>16 x single-core AMD based system with 2GB RAM.<br>Each system is running nginx + php-cgi-fpm (10 instances of)<br>
Here is a graph of a typical day's load on CPU<br><a href="http://ispman.net/doc/tmp/i3713-497b2727561e3.png">http://ispman.net/doc/tmp/i3713-497b2727561e3.png</a><br><br>Here is a weekly graph which shows almost no CPU activity for half a day on 21st.<br>
<a href="http://ispman.net/doc/tmp/i3713-497b262cd3c4b.png">http://ispman.net/doc/tmp/i3713-497b262cd3c4b.png</a><br>The only thing I changed was redirected the php requests to a dedicated server.<br><br>And here you can see the graph on one server on 21st. between 00:00 and 15:00<br>
<a href="http://ispman.net/doc/tmp/i3715-497b29746ebc9.png">http://ispman.net/doc/tmp/i3715-497b29746ebc9.png</a><br><br>It seems like the server was doing nothing but was getting the same amount of requests. <br>So from this I know that moving the php-cgi to dedicate host will allow me to better scale the system.<br>
<br>Now about the php-processes.<br>I have a memory log for each php-request and it takes between 0.5MB to 2.5MB (this is after the opcache eaccelerator)<br><br>But this is now. I want to scale the system to be tranquille for the next 2 years.<br>
So would a 2 - 4 of these servers ( <a href="http://www.sun.com/servers/coolthreads/t5140/">http://www.sun.com/servers/coolthreads/t5140/</a> ) with 32GB RAM be overkill <br><br>Would these more more suitable<br>2-4 <a href="http://www.sun.com/servers/x64/x4150/">http://www.sun.com/servers/x64/x4150/</a> with 8 cores and 32-64GB RAM.<br>
<br>From price level I think they will come to more or less the same.<br>I like the idea to take some extra RAM and put the tmp files, cached opcode files and smarty generated template in the RAM.<br>With the low prices of RAM it wont make a hole in the budget neither.<br>
<br>Oh and for page views we have around 0.5M at the moment but this is growing quiet fast.<br><br>Thanks and keep the ideas coming.<br><br>best regards <br>Atif<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 3:53 PM, Jure Pečar <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:pegasus@nerv.eu.org">pegasus@nerv.eu.org</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">On Fri, 23 Jan 2009 15:24:01 +0100<br>
<div class="Ih2E3d">Atif Ghaffar <<a href="mailto:atif.ghaffar@gmail.com">atif.ghaffar@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
</div><div class="Ih2E3d">> Hi. Jure,<br>
><br>
> Thanks for the valuable advice.<br>
> I will look in the cool-thread servers from Sun. We are usually buying<br>
> from Sun but moslty the x64 server.<br>
><br>
> The php application is a typical CMS for a hosting company.<br>
<br>
</div>Then you should analyze it further. Are you sure your bottleneck is really<br>
cpu?<br>
<br>
Because "typical CMS" usualy means poorly designed database and there's<br>
where your bottleneck is. For those kind of problems it's usually more<br>
efficient at the longer term to throw expirienced programmers at the<br>
problem :)<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
<br>
--<br>
</font><div><div></div><div class="Wj3C7c"><br>
Jure Pečar<br>
<a href="http://jure.pecar.org" target="_blank">http://jure.pecar.org</a><br>
<a href="http://f5j.eu" target="_blank">http://f5j.eu</a><br>
<br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>