Why are you using Varnish to serve primarily images? Modern webservers serve static files very efficiently off the filesystem. Best regards,
--Michael On Sun, Jun 1, 2008 at 8:58 AM, Barry Abrahamson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > Is anyone running multiple varnish instances per server (one per disk > or similar?) > > We are currently running a single varnish instance per server using > the file backend. Machines are Dual Opteron 2218, 4GB RAM, and 2 > 250GB SATA drives. We have the cache file on a software RAID 0 > array. Our cache size is set to 300GB, but once we get to 100GB or > so, IO starts to get very spiky, causing loads to spike into the 100 > range. Our expires are rather long (1-2 weeks). My initial thoughts > were that this was caused by cache file fragmentation, but we are > seeing similar issues when using the malloc backend. We were thinking > that running 2 instances per server with smaller cache files (one per > physical disk), may improve our IO problems. Is there any performance > benefit/detriment to running multiple varnish instances per server? > Is there a performance hit for having a large cache? > > Request rates aren't that high (50-150/sec), but the cached files are > all images, some of which can be rather big (3MB). > > Also, is anyone else seeing similar issues under similar workloads? > -- > Barry Abrahamson | Systems Wrangler | Automattic > Blog: http://barry.wordpress.com > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > varnish-misc mailing list > varnish-misc@projects.linpro.no > http://projects.linpro.no/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc > >
_______________________________________________ varnish-misc mailing list varnish-misc@projects.linpro.no http://projects.linpro.no/mailman/listinfo/varnish-misc
