[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [K12OSN] I need to make Flash work faster....wanna pitch



Petre Scheie worte:

------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 09:22:54 -0600
From: Petre Scheie <petre maltzen net>
Subject: Re: [K12OSN] I need to make Flash work faster....wanna pitch
To: "Support list for opensource software in schools."
<k12osn redhat com>
Message-ID: <41E540CE 7070407 maltzen net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
I was thinking the same thing. Since buying another big machine to support
FF/Flash may not be possible, perhaps one could use a handful of smaller
machines. Then, in the script to call FF/Flash, you have some code that says
'if this script is being called from workstation 1 through 10, run FF/Flash on
appserver1; if being called from workstation 11 through 20, run FF/Flash on
appserver2' and so on. The downside is that workstations are tied to specific
app servers, and if one of the app servers crashes, those workstations won't
automatically switch to another app server. But...(thinks about it for a
moment)...in that same FF/Flash script you could have it check to make sure its
primary app server is up; if yes, run it from there; if no, go to the next app
server and repeat. I'm thinking something like this:
#!/bin/bash
case $DISPLAY in
ws001* )
if ping -c 1 -w 1 appsrv1
then
ssh appsrv1 firefox
elif ping -c 1 -w 1 appsrv2
then
ssh appsrv2 firefox
elif ping -c 1 -w 1 appsrv3
then
ssh appsrv3 firefox
fi
;;
ws002* )
if ping -c 1 -w 1 appsrv2
then
ssh appsrv2 firefox
elif ping -c 1 -w 1 appsrv3
then
ssh appsrv3 firefox
elif ping -c 1 -w 1 appsrv1
then
ssh appsrv1 firefox
fi
;;
esac
Someone should check my syntax with the case statement, but you get the idea.
Note how the order of the app server changes depending on which workstation the
request comes from. And on the app servers, you'd want to nfs-mount the user's
home directories, which would include ~/.ssh/authorized_keys2 so users can ssh
without needing to give a password and all the other things we've discussed
regarding the setup of app servers.
Petre
Jim Kronebusch wrote:
Would it not make more sense to offload FF/Flash to a
dedicated app server?


That sounds like a better solution to me.  The whole local app thing
seems to contradict what LTSP is trying to accomplish (no local HD's or
moving parts, a "thin" client).  I think Gavin Spurgeon (sorry for
spelling) has a tutorial on setting this up that looks very simple
(haven't actually done it myself yet).  But the downside is I suppose
the hardware for local apps is laying around but you most likely don't
have another high end server.  I wonder how much of a machine would be
needed to just run a single app like FF/Flash for x amount of users.


------------------------------

Would it be better to check which appserver has the LEAST cpu usage and use
that server for the FF/Flash application. This would allow any workstation
to use any appserver. It would also allow limits like (if cpu is 80% utilized
then do not consider this appserver for the FF/Flash application).


Just my penny's worth
Jim Rich

--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]