RE: Performance Problems.. Server hardware smoked by $500 box?

From: John Straiton (jsmailing_at_clickcom.com)
Date: 09/11/03

  • Next message: Alexander Marx: "Re: Performance Problems.. Server hardware smoked by $500 box?"
    To: "'Damian Gerow'" <damian@sentex.net>
    Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 13:19:00 -0400
    
    

    > Thus spake John Straiton (jsmailing@clickcom.com) [11/09/03 12:45]:
    > > Thanks for your suggestions, unfortunately- yes, both scenerios in
    > > production (webserver + db server or db server acting as both) are
    > > slower than the development box serving off of the db server. There
    > > are no local services other than apache on the development machine.
    >
    > What about the server machine?
    I'm sorry I didn't make this clear in the beginning..it's funny what
    stuff you forget actually is important to tell people.

    The production webserver and the development webserver (when this
    exercise started) were *exactly* the same in apache configuration
    (except IP's) and general setup (except hardware differences and the
    production running 4.8-S while the development ran 5.0-R).

    The important hardware differences were shown in my original email.

    > - filesystem usage
    Since they were configured the same, and both out of "Live" production
    when we tested, these would be the same

    > - disk size *and* speed (i.e. 5400 vs 7200 RPM, ATA100 vs. ATA33...)
    The production used a UW SCSI Seagate Cheetah (10K RPM), while the
    development used a Maxtor UDMA133 (7200 RPM)

    > - memory speed (PC100 vs. PC133, DDR200 vs. DDR400...)
    Production 512MB PC133 ECC Registered vs Development 256MB 266Mhz DDR

    > - network troubleshooting (10Mb vs. 100Mb, distance between machines,
    100Mbit, Full Duplex, less than a meter difference between all 3
    machines and the switch they all share (Cisco 3524XL) Together they are
    below 10 meters total cabling.

    > distance between servers, different cards being used...)
    The servers use Intel integrated cards, vs we have a $7 no-name realtek
    card in the development machine.

    > - Software tuning / configuration
    At one point (when we noticed the problem), the only difference between
    the machines was that the development server had less apache servers
    (Min/Max/Start) configured because even with just 5 starting, it would
    begin to swap (cause it ran out of physical ram) after booting.

    > If you're doing heavy disk I/O, then watch IO on the system (iostat).

    When out of production, there's no reason either machine would have any
    disk IO other than normal system logs.

    > Look at network errors (netstat -i), duplex mismatches (link
    > lights on switch vs. what ifconfig tells you), and network
    > load (i.e. production is on a 10Mb hub, development is on a
    > 100Mb switch). Etc., etc., etc.

    They are all connected to the same switch, and the Cisco IOS reports
    zero errors on any of the 3 interfaces. Even when the production machine
    was live, it would have less than 3Mb/sec load on a 100Mbit/FullDuplex
    network.

    I know this kinda sounds like I'm being contradictory, but believe
    me...I'm not. This is why I'm so stumped, because I've looked at
    everything mentioned here but as of yet, haven't been able to justify to
    myself that just the difference in DDR vs SDRAM and 500Mhz is what I am
    to blame for it being visibly faster while serving up web pages.. I'd
    buy that if I were comparing a difference of 50fps in Quake3 but we're
    talking about *apache* here.. Heh..

    I'd hate to think I need to buy a server with 500 more MHz just to test
    that theory. Perhaps there's something like slo-mo for FreeBSD that I
    can use to knock that AMD down to around 1Ghz without having to do it
    via dipswitches on the motherboard... Or well..maybe I'll just crack the
    case and turn it down (hopefully it'll run if I do that)

    Thanks for the suggestions,
    John Straiton
    jks@ clickcom.com
    Clickcom, Inc
    704-365-9970x101

    _______________________________________________
    freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list
    http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
    To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"


  • Next message: Alexander Marx: "Re: Performance Problems.. Server hardware smoked by $500 box?"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: Slowness of Apache
      ... trevj@portland.com (Trevor) wrote: ... I figured it would be apache running out of client processes ... Also figured it could be a switch problem as we ... give the server breathing space. ...
      (comp.os.linux.networking)
    • Re: apache question
      ... # Based upon the NCSA server configuration files originally by Rob McCool. ... # configuration directives that give the server its instructions. ... Directives that control the operation of the Apache server process as ...
      (alt.php)
    • Re: Switching from Mac to PC questions
      ... We're the production department of a weekly newspaper, ... We've been instructed to make switch from Quark 4.1 ... > Recently I switched to Windows and it ... > server consider Linux, but you might need a Windows server if ...
      (comp.publish.prepress)
    • Re: Apache and SSL
      ... # Based upon the NCSA server configuration files originally by Rob McCool. ... # This is the main Apache server configuration file. ... # configuration directives that give the server its instructions. ...
      (RedHat)
    • Re: Apache vs IIS
      ... Windows Server not on my Linux Server so there for I would chose IIS. ... Not that Apache is bad but ASP.NET is far easier and faster to create good web forms in. ... PHP on a IIS server is rather easy to run once you install PHP on a PC but if you only use PHP why not use Apache for Windows. ...
      (alt.php)