geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mariano Kamp <mk...@gmx.de>
Subject Re: RES: "Virtual Hosting"
Date Sat, 09 Aug 2003 20:29:17 GMT
Hi,

  I also believe vertical scaling is pretty important as garbage collection in 
huge vms have just caught on in the latest vm implementations. Furthermore 
some operating systems limit the maximum memory per process to one gig (I 
believe it's the case with aix), so that you need vertical scaling to 
utilizie huge amounts of ram.

Cheers,
Mariano

On Friday 08 August 2003 23:34, Robert McIntosh wrote:
> This brings up a feature that I really miss from the now missing
> Gemstone app server. It had the ability to cluster VMs on a single
> machine (as well as across a network), and allow an admin to partition
> an app across those VMs if needed. It would also cycle VMs on a
> schedule, start up VMs if a particular load threshold was achieved and
> shut down unneeded VMs. Although I am not an admin type, I took one of
> their admin classes and I saw the performance differences by allowing
> the server to add VMs as the client load increased.
>
> I do not remember too many of the details as it was a few years ago, but
> each VM had a configuration specifiying heap size, shutdown schedule,
> etc. Maybe with modern VMs this isn't necessary anymore, but on big
> hardware, like the 16 CPU Solaris box we were using, it seemed a shame
> that if a single VM shutdown for whatever reason that that $250k server
> was now dead as an app server.
>
> my .02 :-)
> Robert
>
> Craig Wohlfeil wrote:
> > I think this should be implemented within the VM as well. Imagine the
> > overhead of having another copy of the server running for every
> > application. I also think that you shouldn't have to have the server
> > installed twice to run a separate VM. With a large server (with
> > clustering support) it can more efficient to run 2/3 small VMs that
> > have the same configuration than one large one.
> >
> > Aaron Mulder wrote:
> >>     However, I'm really suggesting we implement this within the VM,
> >> whereas the above works by running multiple VMs.  If you want to run
> >> multiple VMs, you can always just install the product twice.  I
> >> prefer to
> >> also have the option to run apps sandboxed in the same VM.  Granted you
> >> wouldn't be able to run different apps with different server components
> >> (EJB/Web container, etc.) this way, but I think that's OK.
> >>
> >> Aaron


Mime
View raw message