View Full Version : New WHT servers
headsurfer 07-08-2002, 08:54 PM We are just about complete with the new set of WHT servers. With any luck, we'll be making the migration to new servers early Wednesday morning. Hopefully, this will resolve the current issues with WHT.
The server has been significantly more busy lately with our new advertising push for WHT.
Thanks for your patience during this time.
Robert
The Prohacker 07-08-2002, 09:03 PM Yeah last I checked the current server is a 766 right??
Prolly wouldn't hurt to bump up to a dual :D
FDrive 07-08-2002, 09:48 PM Hi Robert,
Just out of curiousity -- where are the new servers going to be hosted? Still with voxel.net? Or maybe moved to EV1?
headsurfer 07-08-2002, 09:53 PM It is a setup with 2 machines. Both with 2 GB Ram. Dual 1 GHZ (+?) processors. Both with dual nics. They communicate on a private 100 Mb network plus the other nic to the main EV1 network.
I probably butchered the configuration but it is a SMOOTH setup.
fractiousws 07-08-2002, 09:58 PM Originally posted by headsurfer
I probably butchered the configuration but it is a SMOOTH setup.
You can say that again :eek:
cyansmoker 07-09-2002, 02:14 AM What will happen if there are more PHP errors?
Will you reformat the servers?
eheh...sorry that was an easy one, will all the "RS threads" :D
apollo 07-09-2002, 09:24 AM Well, Voxel.net looks like powered by NAC, but WHT powered by MFNX by Above Net... I am not sure, does Voxel has servers colocated with Above Net?
thx
phpjames 07-09-2002, 10:04 AM I know this will never happen but does anyone want to suggest (or force by violence and pain) Chicken or another mod to ********* out all instances of Rackshack. I know they own the board but its just bothering me. Rackshack this, Rackshack that... :puke:
apollo 07-09-2002, 10:30 AM Originally posted by phpjames
I know this will never happen but does anyone want to suggest (or force by violence and pain) Chicken or another mod to ********* out all instances of Rackshack. I know they own the board but its just bothering me. Rackshack this, Rackshack that... :puke:
well, rackshack nowadays own WHT :)
phpjames 07-09-2002, 10:36 AM I know thats the problem. :eek:
RRolfe 07-09-2002, 10:49 AM Originally posted by phpjames
I know thats the problem. :eek:
yes but it would not be fair to **** out rackshack when they have done nothing wrong on this board. Just like another post i read where chicken explain that noone will ever be banned for soemthing they did away from this board. They only get thier name starred out if that do something wrong on the board. What has rackshack done to get them ***'d out? Nothing.
phpjames 07-09-2002, 10:58 AM True I know that was a joke though. I think its the mood Im in today. I am seriously sick of all the hype about RS. They are way over-rated and I dislike the influence they have on the board. Its starting to annoy me. Thats all I wanna say about that. ;-)
RRolfe 07-09-2002, 12:21 PM ahh rackshack may have some influence over the board.... but i have not seen them use it.
mahinder 07-09-2002, 04:36 PM rackshack influence is becuase of there horny prices. :D
iamdave 07-09-2002, 05:38 PM Nice to know that WHT will be hosted on new, more powerful servers.
Originally posted by mahinder
rackshack influence is becuase of there horny prices. :D
horny prices? mmmm...:liplick:
zdwebhosting 07-09-2002, 06:38 PM glad to hear about the new servers :)
can't wait to see how they do :)
FDrive 07-09-2002, 08:23 PM Originally posted by headsurfer
It is a setup with 2 machines. Both with 2 GB Ram. Dual 1 GHZ (+?) processors. Both with dual nics. They communicate on a private 100 Mb network plus the other nic to the main EV1 network.
I probably butchered the configuration but it is a SMOOTH setup.
Sweet! Good luck with the transition :)
Rochen 07-09-2002, 08:57 PM Just out of interested how big is the WHT DB? :D
iamdave 07-09-2002, 09:13 PM Originally posted by rochen
Just out of interested how big is the WHT DB? :D I say no more than 50 KB...LOL.:stickout
utadmin 07-09-2002, 10:21 PM 50 KB
:eek:
So much disk space :rolleyes:
i would have thought over 25MB maybe :D
It not about disk space ... though .. its about how many mysql connections to the server vB makes ... imagen how much of the proccessor it takes
Now imagen it on a raq 3 or 4 :eek:
Im sure the wht db is well into the hundreds in terms of MB .
iamdave 07-09-2002, 11:56 PM Originally posted by utadmin
50 KB
:eek:
So much disk space :rolleyes:
i would have thought over 25MB maybe :D
It not about disk space ... though .. its about how many mysql connections to the server vB makes ... imagen how much of the proccessor it takes
Now imagen it on a raq 3 or 4 :eek: Did you think I was serious?
utadmin 07-10-2002, 12:03 AM umm .. no ... i havn't seen 1 serious post by you ..yet :rolleyes:
iamdave 07-10-2002, 12:13 AM Originally posted by utadmin
umm .. no ... i havn't seen 1 serious post by you ..yet :rolleyes: Good, let's keep it that way...;)
headsurfer 07-10-2002, 07:04 AM New WHT servers are UP!
edude 07-10-2002, 10:45 AM :stickout :stickout :stickout :stickout
Rotifer 07-10-2002, 07:09 PM Wow, quite fast.
headsurfer 07-10-2002, 08:17 PM Database is ...... 650 megs ........... !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Server load was running from 1 to 6 before teh move jumping to 10 on a somewhat regular basis.
The new server with about 150 users online is running at... drum roll please ..... .1 . Wow!
Thanks for the patience during the move.
Rochen 07-10-2002, 08:19 PM Also just out of interest what is the average bandwidth per month for WHT? Last time I heard it was something like 60GB?
headsurfer 07-10-2002, 08:35 PM I don;t know but we'll now be able to track it.
Rochen 07-10-2002, 08:36 PM Originally posted by headsurfer
I don;t know but we'll now be able to track it.
:)
The Prohacker 07-10-2002, 08:42 PM Originally posted by headsurfer
Database is ...... 650 megs ........... !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Server load was running from 1 to 6 before teh move jumping to 10 on a somewhat regular basis.
The new server with about 150 users online is running at... drum roll please ..... .1 . Wow!
Thanks for the patience during the move.
1 on 2 dual proc servers?????? Do you have a my.cnf defined, and apache tweaked out???
1 just seems really high for that kinda setup with just 150 users...
WebDev 07-10-2002, 08:42 PM Just thought I'd update, with 222 people logged in, we have the following:
6:41pm up 3:22, 2 users, load average: 0.04, 0.07, 0.08
The Prohacker 07-10-2002, 08:48 PM Originally posted by WebDev
Just thought I'd update, with 222 people logged in, we have the following:
6:41pm up 3:22, 2 users, load average: 0.04, 0.07, 0.08
Now that sounds more like it :)
WebDev 07-10-2002, 08:48 PM It's not 1, it's .1 :)
The Prohacker 07-10-2002, 08:55 PM Originally posted by WebDev
It's not 1, it's .1 :)
Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh Doh... :D
I didn't see the .
ADEhost 07-10-2002, 11:15 PM Originally posted by headsurfer
It is a setup with 2 machines. Both with 2 GB Ram. Dual 1 GHZ (+?) processors. Both with dual nics. They communicate on a private 100 Mb network plus the other nic to the main EV1 network.
I probably butchered the configuration but it is a SMOOTH setup.
LOL, you saying that your going dual server with dual cpu's and then your talking about dual nic cars ( taking a guess but load balancing or offloading the cpu )
I got to ask this because I run some hardcore clients. Did anybody look at the load's from what they are comming from and optimize the hardware at that level ?
Vbullitin has some specific habits like accessing the drive for reads rather alot ( more than most if you ask me ), get some of the newer controller cards that have huge cache's 3gig, that will give you an I/O read boost of about 20% if not more, and since this a 1 application servers make a small ram drive of about 3 megs and load all the images there, that will give you a huge i/o read savings on user non-cache pages ( you save the physical read request to the hard drive and the delay )
Mike
WebDev 07-10-2002, 11:19 PM The harddrives and controller used in the new machine are significantly better than what was being used. It was an all around upgrade to cover several bases.
TimPD 07-11-2002, 12:59 AM Very Sweet, they're ALOT faster.
clever 07-11-2002, 01:37 AM Originally posted by TimPD
Very Sweet, they're ALOT faster.
First Grade Writing Lesson:
English dictionary contrains no such word as 'alot'.
phpjames 07-11-2002, 01:56 AM Tim should know better as he is still in hs or just fresh out of it. Silly kiddies. :D
Studio64 07-11-2002, 03:31 AM Not really sure if this should go here or not...
But, ever since the move I can't type a search in.
(Get the: "Sorry! The administrator has specified that you can only do one search every 15 seconds" error)
This happens all the time. Tried logging out and logging back in but, to no avail...
Weird thing is that I can use the view new post button and the search button on every post....
No real clue whats up w/ it.
WebDev 07-11-2002, 07:59 AM My bet is it had to do with the little 'timewarp' issue we had right after setup, lemme look into it.
Originally posted by WebDev
My bet is it had to do with the little 'timewarp' issue we had right after setup, lemme look into it.
woaaa, I never knew you were a mod...:D
Since when did YOU assume that position without my knowledge?? :stickout
phpjames 07-11-2002, 09:43 AM WebDev better get kicking on the post counts. Newbies status sucks! Login to the database and pull the "chicken" :stickout --- I know its not true but its funny to assume his post count is so high because he edited the WHT database. Chiken rocks though. Get it in gear WebDev. :cool:
| 