[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: New machine for shitbox
From: |
Samuel Thibault |
Subject: |
Re: New machine for shitbox |
Date: |
Sat, 5 Jul 2008 12:57:27 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.12-2006-07-14 |
Dani Doni, le Sat 05 Jul 2008 13:52:07 +0200, a écrit :
> On 7/5/08, Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@ens-lyon.org> wrote:
> > Dani Doni, le Sat 05 Jul 2008 13:21:29 +0200, a écrit :
> >
> > > On 7/5/08, olafBuddenhagen@gmx.net <olafBuddenhagen@gmx.net> wrote:
> > > Hi folks,
> > >
> > > > On the other hand, the wiki seems to need a fast machine, so using it
> > > > for the wiki exclusively would be a waste...
> > > > Not sure what the best approach is. Ideally, they should run in two
> > > > distinct VMs sharing the hardware :-)
> > >
> > > Maybe using web caching software like memcached[1] can help minimize
> > > disk access, as wiki content could be served from memory and only
> > > updates would hit the database triggering a cache update.
> >
> >
> > The problem is _not_ serving, it is updating.
> >
> > If the cpu is 100% busy during updates, then that's the cpu which is too
> > slow, not the disk.
> Maybe I am wrong, but updates on wiki content should trigger little
> bursts of activity, not sustained periods of 100% cpu load.
The wiki engine regenerates all the pages, that's what takes time.
Samuel
Re: New machine for shitbox / wiki system, Thomas Schwinge, 2008/07/08