Re: New machine for shitbox

[Dani Doni]

On 7/5/08, Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@ens-lyon.org> wrote:
> 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.
Oh... ok, I see...

-- 
Dani
Doni