Does anyone have any opinions on which file system is best for a busy
webserver (7 million hits/month)? Is anyone one system noticeably better
than any other?
Just curious. I'm getting ready to setup a new box running FreeBSD 9, and
since I'm starting from scratch, I'm questioning all my
Does anyone have any opinions on which file system is best for a busy
webserver (7 million hits/month)? Is anyone one system noticeably better
than any other?
Use stock UFS, just configure it properly. most importantly noatime.
Amount of cached data is more important than hit count. Unless
On Thu, 16 Aug 2012 10:45:25 -0500
Paul Schmehl pschmehl_li...@tx.rr.com wrote:
Does anyone have any opinions on which file system is best for a busy
webserver (7 million hits/month)? Is anyone one system noticeably better
than any other?
That's an average of about 3 hits per
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2012 10:45:25 -0500
From: Paul Schmehl pschmehl_li...@tx.rr.com
To: FreeBSD Questions List freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Best file system for a busy webserver
Does anyone have any opinions on which file system is best for a busy
webserver (7 million hits/month
--On August 16, 2012 6:02:57 PM +0100 Steve O'Hara-Smith st...@sohara.org
wrote:
On Thu, 16 Aug 2012 10:45:25 -0500
Paul Schmehl pschmehl_li...@tx.rr.com wrote:
Does anyone have any opinions on which file system is best for a busy
webserver (7 million hits/month)? Is anyone one system
Paul Schmehl writes:
That's an average of about 3 hits per second. If it's static pages
then pretty much anything will handle it easily (but please don't use
FAT). If it's dynamic then the whole problem is more complex than a
simple page rate. If that load is bursty it may make a
system is best for a busy
webserver (7 million hits/month)? Is anyone one system noticeably
better than any other?
That's an average of about 3 hits per second. If it's static
pages then pretty much anything will handle it easily (but please don't
use FAT). If it's dynamic
--On August 16, 2012 9:42:30 PM +0100 Steve O'Hara-Smith st...@sohara.org
wrote:
I don't even know where to begin. There's about 15G of data on the
server.
OK I would say there's no pressing reason to consider ZFS for this
purpose. You'd save a bit of time in crash recovery with no
On 08/16/2012 01:16 PM, Paul Schmehl wrote:
Paul Schmehl pschmehl_li...@tx.rr.com wrote:
Does anyone have any opinions on which file system is best for a busy
webserver (7 million hits/month)? Is anyone one system noticeably
better than any other?
With only 15G of data, I'd recommend
OK I would say there's no pressing reason to consider ZFS for this
another ZFS fanatics. it is about performance.
direction for a filesystem, at 15GB if performance ever becomes a problem a
RAID1 of SSDs with UFS would make it fly probably into the hundreds of hits
per second range.
the OCZ Vertex IIIs (About $1/G these days) wired into a *hardware*
RAID controller setup to mirror them. This gives you blazing speed
just like i would read some popular street PC newspaper.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 10:45 AM, Paul Schmehl pschmehl_li...@tx.rr.comwrote:
Does anyone have any opinions on which file system is best for a busy
webserver (7 million hits/month)? Is anyone one system noticeably better
than any other?
Just curious. I'm getting ready to setup a new box
12 matches
Mail list logo
