On Wed, 24 Jun 1998, Shawn McMahon wrote:
> 56k won't cut it. Last time I checked, 128k would, but I wouldn't be
> surprised if it's gone past that now.
I don't think you have. A full newsfeed is up over 10GB per day. It
requires almost a full T-1 just to carry the news. Over half of this is
alt.binaries.
It really seems to have ballooned. A year ago a full feed was only 4GB
per day.
> More importantly, however, will your hard drives cut it? A single big,
> fast drive won't. 2 probably won't.
No, drives are rarely the issue. If you had one 25GB drive (suboptimal),
or 4+ 8GB drives (more optimal), you wouldn't be hurting. Those disk
caches these days are just amazing. :)
> The big news servers run with many small drives striped, and you're better
> off if the history file is on multiple spindles that aren't also doing
> something else.
I don't think the history file benefits so much from being on a striped
disk. The news spool itself certainly does.
> BTW, older versions of INN supposedly can't even handle the volume even
> with fast hardware, but I can't confirm this, having never run it on
> sufficient hardware with a full feed. I suspect the figures may be
> bogus, since they came from sales people for a commercial news server
> product.
They are bogus. Modern INN is much more efficient than old INN, but if
you have a relatively recent INN, you'll do fine. Be sure you make the
appropriate tweaks to your kernel (file handles and all that) and format
your disks with lots of extra inodes (for all the symbolic links).
Don't forget: sufficiently fast hardware makes all problems go away.
That's the Microsoft credo, and there is some truth to it :)
--
PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES!
http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe" as the Subject.
