Web Hosting Talk : Web Hosting Main Forums : Dedicated Server : Website too large for one server... what now?

[noreason296]

As the title implies, our website is too large for one dual Xeon 2.8 / 2 GB RAM / 2 x 78 SCSI, etc.

We've actually put our website over two servers and updated the 2nd database somewhat weekly.

The website is very database intensive and I am wondering what our options would be in expanding. Budget is a concern and getting a dedicated load balancer from TP seems a bit too pricey for us right now.

I have looked up some information and it seems like we have a few solutions...

1) DNS round robin

2) load balancer dedicated hardware

3) load balancing with software on server

We think apache + mysql could both use some more help but how would the data be kept in sync? Two servers would most likely be the best for us right now but do we setup two servers with the same data and keep it in sync or one dedicated mysql server and one apache be more effective? How would the we connect an apache server with the mysql server, with a private switch?

As you can see we have no experience with multiple server solutions and need some help with it. Any insight would be helpful. Thanks!

[darksoul]

The best setup would be to split apache and mysql on different servers.
You can interconnect them through a private net or if its not too much
traffic between the two a regular connection will do as well.

[TDMWeb]

Use a separate database server, and tune MySQL as best you can. You can use round-robin DNS to balance between the two webservers.

If the database is read-only then it should be easy enough to have multiple database servers and update both, otherwise you are into database server clustering which is a whole different ballgame...

[dkitchen]

Two machines:

One frontend for Apache
One backend for MySQL

Stick them both in the same vLan and you're sorted.

[mahinder]

host on a sun based server ?

[noreason296]

Thanks for the input guys:

With the one apache and one mysql server.. a person accessing the website would be going to the apache server and say we're in The Planet (connected the server with a switch) would that mean that our server is down to 2000 GB a month instead of the 4000 GB from both servers?

Also what are some places you guys would recommend for dual xeons or opterons?

we are considering

ThePlanet (but they have server availability issues)
Ev1servers
Serverwizards (they do all our management right now)
Serverplace (they seem cheap but are in GNAX?)

[mycroftx]

On this cases i would strongly recommend to use cluster.

[eWebtricity]

Do like they say, split them out. If your site is database intensive be sure to get a "private link" between the servers. Not everybody does this, Rackspace does but 1and1.com for instance doesn't. Just check with whoever you go with otherwise you'll be paying for the bandwidth between the servers and that's not cool. Your bandwidth won't be reduced by much if any just becuase your going to one frontend server maybe two. Your still going to have just as many people coming to the site as before.....hopefully more right so you'll end up with 4000GB from one server instead.

[packetm0nkey]

I would start off with what the others have suggested. One frontend web server and 1 DB server and see if that helps.

If that doesnt improve performance much there are companies that make really nice LAMP clustering solutions such as http://www.continuent.com/ With their setup you can have load balancing, fail over, and split the apache and MySQL load across 2 or more servers. Fully redundant, fast, and works well.

There are a few hosting providers that offer this, but it isn't cheap so that may be out of your league right now.

[DjMiX]

Originally Posted by packetm0nkey

I would start off with what the others have suggested. One frontend web server and 1 DB server and see if that helps.

If that doesnt improve performance much there are companies that make really nice LAMP clustering solutions such as http://www.continuent.com/ With their setup you can have load balancing, fail over, and split the apache and MySQL load across 2 or more servers. Fully redundant, fast, and works well.

There are a few hosting providers that offer this, but it isn't cheap so that may be out of your league right now.

That's what I would do too.

[MysticServer]

Ditto for 1 apache server, and one database server. Get a Private switch and you should have the bandwidth/transfer caps, of both servers. Users would connect to the apache server, and all data between the two servers wouldn't count against your bandwidth.

I am pretty sure, if I read their order forms right, you could get this setup from layered tech (and many other dedicated hosting companies).

-Jason

[mmxsaro]

Originally Posted by Chainsaw76

Ditto for 1 apache server, and one database server. Get a Private switch and you should have the bandwidth/transfer caps, of both servers. Users would connect to the apache server, and all data between the two servers wouldn't count against your bandwidth.

I am pretty sure, if I read their order forms right, you could get this setup from layered tech (and many other dedicated hosting companies).

-Jason

Yep, LayeredTech does this. I am considering going with this route myself on LT.

[dball256]

Originally Posted by noreason296

As the title implies, our website is too large for one dual Xeon 2.8 / 2 GB RAM / 2 x 78 SCSI, etc.

We've actually put our website over two servers and updated the 2nd database somewhat weekly.

When you say your website is too large for one server, do you mean

1. Out of disk space? TP offers servers with more SCSI Drives.

2. Out of bandwidth? TP offers another 1000GB for $300 per month last time I looked. If you have a lot of graphics, you might move them to another server.

3. The disk is too busy? Add another SCSI drive or Upgrade the server with another GB or two of memory, which it can use as a disk cache. More memory will also help if you're using swap space. Another SCSI drive will mean that more disk I/O operations can be in progress at once.

4. Out of CPU? IIRC, They do have Dual 3.2 Xeon servers which you might be able to get as an existing user. I'm not sure if the FSB is faster on the 3.2.


You might get a server management company like Acunett (http://www.acunett.com/management/) to optimize your server. There are quite a few things that can be tuned to improve server and database performance.

-- David

[dball256]

Originally Posted by mmxsaro

Yep, LayeredTech does this. I am considering going with this route myself on LT.

Look at their Layer 4 offerings. I'd love to try one of those.

• 4 Opterons (either 4 842 single cores or 2 265 Dual Cores)
• Up to 8 GB of ram. On the 2 x 265 system, this is only $175 per month.
• Up to 4 SCSI drives of 73GB, 146GB, or 300GB.
• They have some nice bandwidth upgrades too.

I've never dealt with LayeredTech, so I don't know how good they are, but they have some interesting offerings.

-- David

[juice99]

you can squeeze a lot from one server, if you have time for tuning. i mean A LOT. Analyze your statistics, look how many requests to your DB hits the cache, look how much of the cache is actually used.

if you use linux, install mtop and watch closely, then tweak my.cnf. If you dont know how, pay someone who can do it.

I'm pretty sure, that _IF_ this server was never tweaked you can have even 200% or more performance boost. (it can be even 500% or more, if default settings are not good for you)

You can also tweak apache a lot.

You can change scripts on your page that you are using, maybe there are a lot of SELECT * from something; statements.

There are a lot of possibilites, buying yet another server might not be always the best solution.