On Tue, 8 Jul 2014 09:44:57 -0400 (EDT)
"Steve Snyder" wrote:
> > ...renice to 10...
>
> This is good for the Tor process itself, but disadvantages other processes.
> If your server is doing name resolution (as an exit node) the resolver may be
> impacted, which in turn will hamper handling of
Hello Steve,
>> ...renice to 10...
> This is good for the Tor process itself, but disadvantages other
> processes. If your server is doing name resolution (as an exit node)
> the resolver may be impacted, which in turn will hamper handling of exit
> traffic.
> If you're running as a middle node
> ...renice to 10...
This is good for the Tor process itself, but disadvantages other processes. If
your server is doing name resolution (as an exit node) the resolver may be
impacted, which in turn will hamper handling of exit traffic.
If you're running as a middle node then Never Mind.
On T
Thank you to all for the useful information; especially to Roman,
Julien and Scott.
I want to make optimal use of my existing dedi rather than hiring a
more powerful one, so I've set NumCPUs to 2, renice to 10 and will
reboot (as the latter is an init script I guess reboot is necessary.)
I will th
Roman Mamedov wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Jul 2014 23:30:22 -0700
> "Asa Rossoff" wrote:
>
> > With hyperthreading, I think 4 would be optimal?
>
> Yes, 4 can be set, but I remember reading somewhere that Tor doesn't scale
> well beyond NumCPUs 2 (and poorly even to 2).
See my previous note in this
On Mon, 7 Jul 2014 23:30:22 -0700
"Asa Rossoff" wrote:
> With hyperthreading, I think 4 would be optimal?
Yes, 4 can be set, but I remember reading somewhere that Tor doesn't scale
well beyond NumCPUs 2 (and poorly even to 2).
One way to increase utilization further would be to run a second ins
"Asa Rossoff" wrote:
> On 7 July 2014, 04:49 UTC, Roman Mamedov wrote:
> > On Mon, 07 Jul 2014 21:31:02 +0100
> > kingqueen wrote:
> >
> > > [stuff deleted --SB]
> >
> > Set "NumCPUs 2" in your torrc to make it try utilizing the second core
> > too
> > (this won't help much, but at least some
On 7 July 2014, 04:49 UTC, Roman Mamedov wrote:
> On Mon, 07 Jul 2014 21:31:02 +0100
> kingqueen wrote:
>
> > Hi, I'm running a Tor relay on a low cost dedicated server.
> >
> > The tor relay is named kingqueen and it's running on an Intel Atom
> N2700 dual core hyperthreaded CPU with 2gb of memo
On Mon, 07 Jul 2014 21:31:02 +0100
kingqueen wrote:
> Hi, I'm running a Tor relay on a low cost dedicated server.
>
> The tor relay is named kingqueen and it's running on an Intel Atom N2700 dual
> core hyperthreaded CPU with 2gb of memory, in a data centre with a symmetric
> 100mbps connectio
Julien,
That is very useful and well explained.
Thank you.
Robert
>
> The problem with Tor is the "single-thread working" for
> encryption/relaying, so if you have a second CPU core available, may be
> you can open a second Tor instance in order to use the second core
> capacity.
>
> In fact,
l will make you aware of a lot of interesting details and possibilities.
Good luck !
Julien ROBIN
- Mail original -
De: "kingqueen"
À: tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
Envoyé: Lundi 7 Juillet 2014 22:31:02
Objet: [tor-relays] CPU usage
Hi, I'm running a Tor relay on a low
Hi, I'm running a Tor relay on a low cost dedicated server.
The tor relay is named kingqueen and it's running on an Intel Atom N2700 dual
core hyperthreaded CPU with 2gb of memory, in a data centre with a symmetric
100mbps connection.
I have found as time goes on and usage of my relay increases
12 matches
Mail list logo
