On Feb 8, 2007, at 7:30 PM, Robby Russell wrote:
> > Raul wrote: >> Hi again. All the great assistance so far has moved me along. I'm >> still a Linux noob but I've settled on CentOS 4.4 and have it up and >> running on a test server right now. I'll be testing two >> scenarios: one >> with Apache 2.2 and mod_proxy_balancer in front of a mongrel cluster, >> and another with NGINX in front of a mongrel cluster. >> >> Remeber I have 3 machines with dual, dual-core Xeons and 16gb of >> ram per >> server and I want to maximize the performance, 146gb of storage on >> two >> and a 73gb mirror with a 600gb raid 5 on the last one (I had >> intended to >> use the raid5 for the mySQL database). So I've looked into >> virtualization a bit to see what the benefits might be and it sounds >> great. Now I noticed that XenExpress only supports up to 4gb of >> ram and >> I understand there may be a mySQL 4gb per process limit as well. I >> could buy commercial Xen but I found OpenVZ (open source branch of >> Virtuozzo) and it sounds pretty good too. I understand that each >> solution accomplishes virtualization in different ways though so any >> guidance would be appreciated. > > We've been testing both of these solutions out. Xen is pretty > rocking if > you want to manage several different distros and such. Each virtual > server has it's own kernel running with Xen... which will take more > resources on the server than OpenVZ. There is also the overhead of > managing that many more servers/kernels. > > OpenVZ shares it's kernel with each of the virtual machines and works > more like a FreeBSD jail. One of the cool features that really caught > our attention as we've been investigating tools for our new product is > live migrations! > > "Delivery of the checkpointing and live migration functionality as > part > of OpenVZ brings a capability that no other open source operating > system-level virtualization software offers. It allows system > administrators to move virtual servers between physical servers > without > end-user disruption or the need for costly storage capacity." > > http://openvz.org/news/announcements/kernel-2.6.9-stable-20061114 Ummm... Xen can do this too. > > ..pretty cool, huh? definitely cool, to be able to move a whole VM from one host to another without any down time is kick ass ;) > > -Robby > > -- > Robby Russell > http://www.robbyonrails.com/ > http://www.planetargon.com/ Xen outperforms openvz. It also doesn't allow the host to oversell boxes. OpenVZ allows physical resource to be oversold based on the premis that hopefully not all of the VM's go nuts with cpu and mem at the same time. If this is your own 3 servers and you have lots of ram then I think Xen is the better choice. You do pay for running a kernel for each VM but you gain better isolation and performance for this. Cheers- -- Ezra Zygmuntowicz -- Lead Rails Evangelist -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Engine Yard, Serious Rails Hosting -- (866) 518-YARD (9273) --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Deploying Rails" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-deployment@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-deployment?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
