Comments on: A brief update with some numbers for hardware load-balanced mongrels http://www.joyent.com/joyeurblog/2007/02/04/a-brief-update-with-some-numbers-for-hardware-load-balanced-mongrels/ Just another WordPress weblog Thu, 18 Mar 2010 22:51:24 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc hourly 1 By: Alistair http://www.joyent.com/joyeurblog/2007/02/04/a-brief-update-with-some-numbers-for-hardware-load-balanced-mongrels/comment-page-1/#comment-1326 Alistair Thu, 22 Feb 2007 11:55:21 +0000 http://joycomad.joyent.us/blog/uncategorized/a-brief-update-with-some-numbers-for-hardware-load-balanced-mongrels/#comment-1326 <p>Jason,</p> <p>Out of interest, did you look into the Citrix Netscaler at all? </p> <p>We run them at work in front of our web server and Citrix application clusters with superb results.</p> <p>Al.</p> Jason,

Out of interest, did you look into the Citrix Netscaler at all?

We run them at work in front of our web server and Citrix application clusters with superb results.

Al.

]]> By: Jason Hoffman http://www.joyent.com/joyeurblog/2007/02/04/a-brief-update-with-some-numbers-for-hardware-load-balanced-mongrels/comment-page-1/#comment-1388 Jason Hoffman Tue, 13 Feb 2007 06:55:16 +0000 http://joycomad.joyent.us/blog/uncategorized/a-brief-update-with-some-numbers-for-hardware-load-balanced-mongrels/#comment-1388 <p>@ Blake, I don’t think it’s expensive, and there’s not much of a difference in the costs of scaling rails versus php or anything else. Not when compared to what people costs, which is where it begins to get expensive.</p> @ Blake, I don’t think it’s expensive, and there’s not much of a difference in the costs of scaling rails versus php or anything else. Not when compared to what people costs, which is where it begins to get expensive.

]]> By: Blake http://www.joyent.com/joyeurblog/2007/02/04/a-brief-update-with-some-numbers-for-hardware-load-balanced-mongrels/comment-page-1/#comment-1387 Blake Mon, 12 Feb 2007 19:06:25 +0000 http://joycomad.joyent.us/blog/uncategorized/a-brief-update-with-some-numbers-for-hardware-load-balanced-mongrels/#comment-1387 <p>@Jason</p> <p>>> “I haven’t really seen a greater cost-outlay relative to say a PHP application.”</p> <p>I’m sorry for asking this, but I don’t understand. </p> <p>Are you saying that scaling Ruby on Rails is extremely expensive or inexpensive?</p> <p>And are you saying that PHP costs more or less to scale than Ruby on Rails.</p> @Jason

>> “I haven’t really seen a greater cost-outlay relative to say a PHP application.”

I’m sorry for asking this, but I don’t understand.

Are you saying that scaling Ruby on Rails is extremely expensive or inexpensive?

And are you saying that PHP costs more or less to scale than Ruby on Rails.

]]> By: Jason Hoffman http://www.joyent.com/joyeurblog/2007/02/04/a-brief-update-with-some-numbers-for-hardware-load-balanced-mongrels/comment-page-1/#comment-1386 Jason Hoffman Mon, 12 Feb 2007 06:40:25 +0000 http://joycomad.joyent.us/blog/uncategorized/a-brief-update-with-some-numbers-for-hardware-load-balanced-mongrels/#comment-1386 <p>@ Nathan, I haven’t really seen a greater cost-outlay relative to say a PHP application. It’s a combination of the fact that most computers are more then powerful enough, and that often the bottlenecks are really traffic direction and load-balancing issues (both in front of app and in front of db).</p> <p>@Dieter Yes more is definitely possible, this is only ~1/10th the switching capacity of a big-ip. As that goes up, then it would be time to attend to the databases.</p> @ Nathan, I haven’t really seen a greater cost-outlay relative to say a PHP application. It’s a combination of the fact that most computers are more then powerful enough, and that often the bottlenecks are really traffic direction and load-balancing issues (both in front of app and in front of db).

@Dieter Yes more is definitely possible, this is only ~1/10th the switching capacity of a big-ip. As that goes up, then it would be time to attend to the databases.

]]> By: Dieter http://www.joyent.com/joyeurblog/2007/02/04/a-brief-update-with-some-numbers-for-hardware-load-balanced-mongrels/comment-page-1/#comment-1385 Dieter Mon, 12 Feb 2007 04:08:28 +0000 http://joycomad.joyent.us/blog/uncategorized/a-brief-update-with-some-numbers-for-hardware-load-balanced-mongrels/#comment-1385 <p>Yeah, that rocks. 4000 r/s is really a lot. Wondering if there is more possible with the same hardware.</p> Yeah, that rocks. 4000 r/s is really a lot. Wondering if there is more possible with the same hardware.

]]> By: Nathan de Vries http://www.joyent.com/joyeurblog/2007/02/04/a-brief-update-with-some-numbers-for-hardware-load-balanced-mongrels/comment-page-1/#comment-1401 Nathan de Vries Mon, 12 Feb 2007 03:46:30 +0000 http://joycomad.joyent.us/blog/uncategorized/a-brief-update-with-some-numbers-for-hardware-load-balanced-mongrels/#comment-1401 <p>In your experience, have you found that the cost-outlay involved in scaling Rails applications (more hardware required) is acceptable due to the reduced development costs? And before you say that “hardware is cheap”, obviously “less hardware is cheaper”.</p> <p>This isn’t a bait, I’m just interested in whether or not you’ve sat back at some stage and said “damn, this requires a hell of a lot of hardware to scale”.</p> In your experience, have you found that the cost-outlay involved in scaling Rails applications (more hardware required) is acceptable due to the reduced development costs? And before you say that “hardware is cheap”, obviously “less hardware is cheaper”.

This isn’t a bait, I’m just interested in whether or not you’ve sat back at some stage and said “damn, this requires a hell of a lot of hardware to scale”.

]]> By: Michael Air http://www.joyent.com/joyeurblog/2007/02/04/a-brief-update-with-some-numbers-for-hardware-load-balanced-mongrels/comment-page-1/#comment-1400 Michael Air Sun, 11 Feb 2007 16:20:55 +0000 http://joycomad.joyent.us/blog/uncategorized/a-brief-update-with-some-numbers-for-hardware-load-balanced-mongrels/#comment-1400 <p>Why Mongrels? Wouldn’t lighty/fastcgi be faster?</p> Why Mongrels? Wouldn’t lighty/fastcgi be faster?

]]> By: Jason Hoffman http://www.joyent.com/joyeurblog/2007/02/04/a-brief-update-with-some-numbers-for-hardware-load-balanced-mongrels/comment-page-1/#comment-1398 Jason Hoffman Sat, 10 Feb 2007 02:26:11 +0000 http://joycomad.joyent.us/blog/uncategorized/a-brief-update-with-some-numbers-for-hardware-load-balanced-mongrels/#comment-1398 <p>Hi Vick, we taped one, it should be coming out.</p> Hi Vick, we taped one, it should be coming out.

]]> By: Vick http://www.joyent.com/joyeurblog/2007/02/04/a-brief-update-with-some-numbers-for-hardware-load-balanced-mongrels/comment-page-1/#comment-1397 Vick Fri, 09 Feb 2007 20:25:39 +0000 http://joycomad.joyent.us/blog/uncategorized/a-brief-update-with-some-numbers-for-hardware-load-balanced-mongrels/#comment-1397 <p>No PS Pipe Grep this week?</p> No PS Pipe Grep this week?

]]> By: Chris Yeh http://www.joyent.com/joyeurblog/2007/02/04/a-brief-update-with-some-numbers-for-hardware-load-balanced-mongrels/comment-page-1/#comment-1395 Chris Yeh Thu, 08 Feb 2007 02:55:13 +0000 http://joycomad.joyent.us/blog/uncategorized/a-brief-update-with-some-numbers-for-hardware-load-balanced-mongrels/#comment-1395 <p>We’ve got a BIG-IP as well, and the iRules are one of the main reasons we use it. Mentioned this on another post of yours, but how would you recommend measuring the impact of BIG-IP acceleration?</p> We’ve got a BIG-IP as well, and the iRules are one of the main reasons we use it. Mentioned this on another post of yours, but how would you recommend measuring the impact of BIG-IP acceleration?

]]>