From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Mar 23 17:31:37 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F1D316A4CE for ; Tue, 23 Mar 2004 17:31:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from out012.verizon.net (out012pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.137]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 267EF43D2F for ; Tue, 23 Mar 2004 17:31:37 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from cswiger@mac.com) Received: from mac.com ([68.161.120.219]) by out012.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.06 201-253-122-130-106-20030910) with ESMTP id <20040324013136.ZKWR18295.out012.verizon.net@mac.com>; Tue, 23 Mar 2004 19:31:36 -0600 Message-ID: <4060E4F3.6090103@mac.com> Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 20:31:31 -0500 From: Chuck Swiger Organization: The Courts of Chaos User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: wally morton References: <54A9F806-7D2D-11D8-85F6-000A958F3FB6@hotwally.com> In-Reply-To: <54A9F806-7D2D-11D8-85F6-000A958F3FB6@hotwally.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH at out012.verizon.net from [68.161.120.219] at Tue, 23 Mar 2004 19:31:36 -0600 cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FTP fileserver??? X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 01:31:37 -0000 wally morton wrote: > What is the best way to set up FreeBSD to implement this? Your requirements aren't demanding of anything special except lots of network bandwidth. Serving static content via FTP or HTTP is lightweight. > Just how much hardware do I need? A single-proc P3 system with RAID-10, -1, -5 disk config and a good power supply (redundant if you want to be fancy) should be plenty. > I will connect it to a T1 or better. You're probably going to need to; you mentioned "a daily traffic of 70-200GB", but a full T1 will only give you about 16GB/day (if my math is right). A 10/Mbs ethernet connection or a fractional T3, depending on what's available, is a better fit... > I was thinking this was going to be dual-processor system with a lot of > RAM and to keep as much of the dataset in RAM as possible. Other > ideas?? Is dual CPU a waste of time? Kernel and config changes??? Lots of RAM is a good idea to conserve disk I/O; dual-procs are a waste of money for such a low number of hits per day-- spend the bucks on getting good disks & RAID [preferably SCSI] instead. "man tuning" has some information but you may not need to do anything special to achieve reasonable performance for your application with a stock, untuned system. Have fun! :-) -- -Chuck