[K12OSN] Large scale implementation in the pipe, input needed.
norbert
bear2bar at netscape.net
Fri Aug 20 02:04:44 UTC 2004
Hi Jff,
Well put .....
norbert
jkinz at kinz.org wrote:
>On Fri, Aug 20, 2004 at 12:23:45AM +0200, Daniel Hedblom wrote:
>
>
>>Hello Norbert!
>>
>>So, a server handling about 150 clients would be how big? Ofcourse those
>>wouldnt all be running at the same time at full load. The reason i ask is
>>that i would want to be able to do an estimate on just how big of a server
>>it would have to be. I want to have solid ground under my feet and not
>>just my own experience.
>>
>>
>
>Hi Dan.
>
>How much do you have the students environment locked down?
>
>I have a one installation where we have the the Thin clients(TC)
>absolutely locked down so they can only run OpenOffice and a browser.
>For each TC we try to add about 100MB to the server.
>
>We want to make sure that swap is not used by the TC's since having to
>swap memory over an NFS link is really slow and eats network bandwidth.
>
>So 150 TC = 100MB * 150 = 15000 MB or 15 GB. Caveat - the more TC's
>you add to the server, the smaller memory increment they require.
>
>This is due to the net gain of shared libraries already resident when
>many TC's are running the same apps. So, ultimately this very
>straightforward, linear estimation may cause you to get more memory than
>you need. Of course if you know in advance how many TC's will be
>running what apps at the same time you can get a much better estimate of
>your memory requirements.
>
>Now go look up how much more memory costs per GB when you have to buy
>multi GB sticks. (Pricewatch says 1GB stick is $150 to $247, but they
>are always low) 2 - 1Gb sticks from HP for the "Proliant" system is
>$1149 But .. its warranted for life.. (Funny, so is the stuff from
>Crucial.com thats faster and a tenth of the cost... how strange... )
>
>A 4 Gb stick is $1700.00 -- I see a trend...
>
>If your TC's are not locked down and the students have access to the
>entire set of menus on the desktop then you may need more than 100 MB
>per TC. (you can process limit them so they can't open umpteen apps
>at the same time)
>
>
>As for CPU requirements, A 2 GHz , low end CPU can run 10 TC's which
>aren't too busy. For your system with 1 server, you want a machine
>with as many SMP CPU on it as you can find. at least four and eight is
>better, and you want high end CPU's. XEON's or whatever the current hot
>chip is. Again, you'll pay a premium over the commodity level
>components. 3 to six times as much. (Low end CPU is $60) High end is ?
>
>In addition to being much more expensive, the centralized server
>architecture is riskier and more problematic than having a server at
>each location.
>
>Its weaknesses are:
>
> Single point of failure. If the server goes down, service
> does not degrade "gracefully", it disintegrates.
>
> With multiple servers at least many thin clients(TC)
> would still be able to function,
>
> Increased dependence on unneeded network links. With the
> server in a remote location from the TC's it is serving rather
> than at the same location as the TC's it is serving, the risk of
> a service failure is increased because it is now additionally
> dependent not only on the server running but also on the network
> links being intact (think backhoes, manhole fires,
> automobile/telephone pole accidents etc..) and dependent on the
> network equipment, (Router, switches etc) running as well. A
> final vulnerability is the vendor/supplier who is running those
> comm lines for you. If they have any issues (strikes, software
> glitches, security compromised), your connections between
> buildings are affected and you lose service.
>
> Another network issue is the plugged pipe problem. This much
> X-Windowing will generate a huge amount of traffic. OK maybe
> 1 GB net with smart switches can handle it. But what happens
> when you add streaming video being accessed by 40 or 50 TC
> simultaneously? Many legitimate curricula present their
> content this way, but as these types of content multiply and
> become more diverse, can your network handle the additional
> traffic? Better to use a design that inherently reduces the
> network load from the get go.
>
> Increased dependence on software integrity. In the centralized
> scenario, if any single process consumes more than its share
> of machine resources everyone sharing the single server is hit.
> (Setting disk quotas, memory and process limits will help
> prevent this)
>
> Security issues - One successful attack means all your resources
> get owned and leaves you with no untainted system to use as a
> base to work from.
>
> Expense? The initial outlay for the single high end machine
> that would be required to configure a server of the size needed
> would have a premium of added cost high above the cost
> of the same power/capability obtained by purchasing multiple
> smaller off-shelf machines.
>
> Scaling issues? multiple versus 1 central server(s), each has
> their own set of issues.
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/k12osn/attachments/20040819/55199164/attachment.htm>
More information about the K12OSN
mailing list