we broke that limit a long time ago, the only strange issue is that the odd
VS will just simply stop and require restarting. I believe that one of our
guys wrote a cron that checks the vsd.conf file and then verifys the list
of IPs to ifconfig ie: 341 VS's should equal 342 IPs in ifconfig, if not it
simply issues a vsboot --start missing vs,, and this runs every 10
minutes, we found that performance was ugly with all those IPs aliased to
one NIC, so we installed a second and split them in half, I don't know what
they did to make that work.
The machine Im talking about is an AMD 600 mhz with 256 MB SDRAM, and Ultra
160 drives in a RAID 0 with parity
the other servers are Intel based, and now that I think about it, I don't
think they have any problems like the aforementioned.
things that make you go hmmmmm
Regards
Kevin Druet
At 01:36 PM 4/23/01 +0100, you wrote:
>The maximum number of virtual servers on a single host is dictated by the
>number of supported mount points. The /proc file system within each virtual
>server is mounted, which combined with the the standard mount points on a
>server (/, /var, /etc, /usr, /local) leads to a limit of around 250. I
>believe this limit can be increased however (kernel option?), so is probably
>not the final limit that can be reached... I am not aware of any limit on
>the number of IP aliases a machine can support but there may be one. Let us
>know if you break the 250 limit, and what sort of performance your virtual
>servers are able to provide...
>
>Tim
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Christopher
> > Ranschaert
> > Sent: 23 April 2001 12:37
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Max number of virtual hosts.
> >
> >
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > I have a question concerning the maximum number of hosts on one
> > machine and how the way it is handled.
> >
> > Does it work according to the IPs they get?
> >
> > For example:
> > the machine has a range of IPs between 200.200.200.1 and
> > 200.200.200.255 available
> > or can it also host 200.200.201.1-200.200.201.255 in addition to that?
> >
> > Thanks in advance
> >
> > Christopher
