I would do empirical benchmarks, but it's tricky on Amazon instances, my
experience is that the actual performance can vary a lot over the course
of a month. The problem is that these units don't do much accounting on
I/O or memory bandwidth, so it all depends on what your neighbors are doing.
: Ariel Nunez [mailto:ingenieroar...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, November 26, 2010 10:25 AM
To: geoserver-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: [Geoserver-users] More CPU or more RAM?
Hello list,
I am having to host a few GeoNode instances and it uses GeoServer as
the backend. We have a lot
and disk in the recovery failde instances...
Vince
-Original Message-
From: Ariel Nunez [mailto:ingenieroar...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, November 26, 2010 10:25 AM
To: geoserver-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: [Geoserver-users] More CPU or more RAM?
Hello list,
I am having to host
looks like it's only using ~500MB, and 1G for the OS buffers.
How're you running tomcat/jetty wrt to heap allocation? Be sure to pass
-Xmx as appropriate to the java virtual machine and follow this where
applicable:
http://docs.geoserver.org/stable/en/user/production/index.html
I would go for
How much data is going to be served up? The advantage of more memory would
be that your shapefile disk block would make it in to the OS disk cache, and
then things would go quite fast. Of course once that happens then you'll
definitely be CPU bound, so if most of your data will fit in the 7g of
