Re: Scaledown hardware
- From: Carel-Jan Engel <cjpengel.dbalert@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: niall.litchfield@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2006 18:12:31 +0200
And are you sure your frontend can exclude the other 2400 users? If all
users get to the server, but it has just enough resources to support 25%
of the load, the system might effectively come to a complete halt
instead of serving 25% of the users. You'd better make sure the load in
a DR situation isn't bigger than what the DR server is designed for, to
prevent accumulating disappointment at DR time.
Best regards,
Carel-Jan Engel
===
If you think education is expensive, try ignorance. (Derek Bok)
===
On Sun, 2006-09-24 at 16:52 +0100, Niall Litchfield wrote:
> Do you really mean that 30 active sessions eat 70% of 12 cpus, i.e 9
> cpus? And how many concurrently active users would your dr box
> support? My best guess it would be most of those 30 wouldn't it? If so
> You'd be mad to choose anything other than an identically specced box.
> If on the other hand you actually intended 300 concurrent users and
> the dr box would only be supporting far fewer then you'd likely get
> away with fewer cpus.
>
> On 9/22/06, amonte <ax.mount@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > I am sizing a server for a database which will be used for disaster
> > purposes. It should support 25% of production load.
> >
> > Right now I have a production server with 12 CPU and 48Gb memory, in peak
> > time 70% of CPU usage is observed (30 Active database users) and 40GB is
> > used. This supports 3600 users roughly.
> >
> > Is this that simple divide my actual HW by 4? i.e 3 CPU and 12 GB to support
> > 1200 users? I think I can do that for memory but not that sure for CPU
> > usage.
> >
> > TIA
> >
> >
> > Alex
> >
> >
>
Other related posts:
