[389-users] Fedora DS with virtual machines

[Marc Sauton]

Regarding the top output, the virtual memory is used for opened 
libraries, plug-ins, bdb opened files, and possibly quite some non 
shared anonymous blocks for all dynamic storage needed by the 
application, a pmap -x <pid> can provide with some details.

On a side note, I have been using KVM as a host loaded with ram, running 
Fedora with 10 to 20 guests running different operating systems, 32 and 
64 bits, for quite for RHDS/port389 and RHCS/Dogtag configurations, some 
with several millions ldap entries, for testing and dev, not production, 
and performances are good for me, cpu and i/o wise (up to 1,5K entries 
imported per sec seen), with usually 512MB or 1GB per guest, sometimes more.
M.

John A. Sullivan III wrote:
> Likewise, we are running in VServer (www.linux-vserver.org) with no
> problems at all but our environment is currently much smaller - John
>
> On Tue, 2009-07-14 at 12:42 +1000, Luke Bigum wrote:
>   
>> Hey Nick,
>>
>> We run Fedora DS inside Virtuozzo VEs (not VMWare) and don't have any capacity concerns, our environment sounds like a good tenth the size of yours though. Each VE (there's 2) has only half a GB of RAM and does about 100 connections a minute, however our LDAP database is very small, so the memory we've allocated is massive overkill. In terms of CPU usage, the VE does practically nothing.
>>
>> I wouldn't think you'd need much more RAM over the size of your LDAP database files, so unless you've got 8GB of LDAP information, 8GB of RAM sounds a lot to me. Our LDAP database is only about 40MB, which is close to the RAM usage of the VE.
>>
>> Our stats, might help you decide on what you need. Maybe someone more knowledgeable in the DS internals could explain the large virtual table size.
>>
>> USER      PR  NI  VIRT  RES  SHR S %CPU    TIME+  %MEM COMMAND                                            
>> nobody    18   0  601m  39m  18m S    0  16:29.95  7.7 ns-slapd
>>
>> [root at host:/var/lib/dirsrv/slapd-host]# du -sh .
>> 38M     .
>>
>> Luke Bigum
>> Systems Administrator
>>  (p) 1300 661 668
>>  (f)  1300 661 540
>> (e)  lbigum at iseek.com.au
>> http://www.iseek.com.au
>> Level 1, 100 Ipswich Road Woolloongabba QLD 4102
>>
>>
>>
>> This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, use, distribution or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorised to receive for the recipient), please contact the sender by reply e-mail and delete all copies of this message.
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: fedora-directory-users-bounces at redhat.com [mailto:fedora-directory-users-bounces at redhat.com] On Behalf Of Nick Gresham
>> Sent: Tuesday 14 July 2009 12:18 PM
>> To: fedora-directory-users at redhat.com
>> Subject: [389-users] Fedora DS with virtual machines
>>
>> Hi All
>>
>> Does anyone have any experience running DS in a virtual machine? Our  
>> current LDAP infrastructure is quite busy, 500-1000 connections/ 
>> minute, with >6.5 million operations per day. The VMs will have up to  
>> 8GB of RAM, though we think we'll only need 6.
>>
>> We're performing testing with slamd, but it's hard to get truly  
>> representative stress testing using this tool I think.
>>
>> What has your experience been like? Any snafus to watch out for?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Nick
>>
>> --
>> 389 users mailing list
>> 389-users at redhat.com
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users
>>
>> --
>> 389 users mailing list
>> 389-users at redhat.com
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-users
>>