On Mar 15, 2:24 am, eric <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ezra Zygmuntowicz wrote: > > I haven't tried the place you are talking about myself at all. But I > > did want to say that they don't appear to use Xen, which means they > > use something like OpenVZ that allows the hosting provider to > > oversell resources. Xen does not allow for oversold resources and is > > the performance leader for vps's > > they use virtuozzo.. the problem is that with xen and the same price > will be just 256 mb, 10gb and about 100gb transfer... do you think that > this will be better than 786 mb? maybe the problem is that if anyone > burst the ram he'll takes part of "my" ram, but if it's guaranteed i > think it won't go down 786mb...what do you think ? > another cool (but more expensive) is slicehost: > 1024slice 1024MB 40GB 400GB $70 > and they use xen.... > > -- > Posted viahttp://www.ruby-forum.com/.
I wrote a blog post about how Open VZ defines memory - Virtuozzo is the same base system. You can find that here: http://blog.craz8.com/articles/2006/12/25/openvz-redefines-ram/ Xen based systems allow paging in your VM, so an app that allocates a lot of memory and uses very little of it - Apache, MySQL et al - can work with less Xen memory, but use a lot of Virtuozzo memory. So, in summary, a 768MB Virtuozzo system maybe similar to a 256MB Xen system depending on load. That said, I'm running in a 512MB OpenVZ VM that runs very well at Quantact.com. 256MB was too small for 4 mongrels (2 different apps), MySQL, Monit, Nginx, Postfix. Adding Apache put me up to my 'burst' limit too! --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
