Thanks Francis for replying so quick. Now i got some stuff to think about. Your post will surely help me and other LTSP people out there.
> From: "Chris Thomas" > > I was wondering; is it better to have 2 LTSP servers handle a lab of 30 > > terminals or is it better to have 1 LTSP box and one App server handle 30 > > terminals? I ask this because I've heard some people have multiple LTSP > > boxes and I have also heard people have only one LTSP box and multiple > app > > servers. What do you guys think about these two solutions? > > Thanks. > > I can't answer your question, but I can offer some thoughts. > > First you need some more precise terminology, because you seem to use the > word 'LTSP box' equivocally here. Remember that 'LTSP' involves many > different parts, any of which can be divided or subdivided to different > machines. > > There's DHCP, TFTP, and client's root-NFS. After that are the application > servers, which run your X-clients. There is also the matter of home > directories. 'LTSP' can refer to the whole system together, to the first > three together, or even to only the client root-NFS (which is really the > core of the LTSP package. The rest are normal services that are configured > a certain way.) > > Of course, with the first three (DHCP, TFTP, NFS) you can have each on a > different machine, but since the load for those services is so slight, it's > probably not worth the additional complexity. I will refer to these as > 'LTSP services', to distinguish them from the applications. > > The real flexibility is the app servers. I have to come up with a solution > for around 50 clients, and so I've thought about this quite a bit, and > there > really isn't much help that I've found for those designing servers for LTSP > use--the most common advice is simply to get a machine and try it, and then > find bottlenecks and eliminate them. However, most important on individual > servers seems to be ram and cpu, in that order, with disk i/o and a network > card a more distant collective third. Don't be afraid to max out your > motherboard's ram capacity. And for cpu, better to get one with a large > cache (like a Xeon) than a small one (Celerons, for example, tend to > perform > much worse in proportion to their speed for ltsp, because of their small > cache). > > There are at least five ways I thought of to deal with app servers: one is > to have LTSP services and the apps on the same machine, second to have a > different app on each machine, and third is to alternate apps between > machines, and fourth is to do some sort of process-level load sharing, > namely MOSIX. The fifth is to use your display manager to choose a server > to provide X clients, through indirect XDMCP requests. > <snip> ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Gadgets, caffeine, t-shirts, fun stuff. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _____________________________________________________________________ Ltsp-discuss mailing list. To un-subscribe, or change prefs, goto: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltsp-discuss For additional LTSP help, try #ltsp channel on irc.openprojects.net
