On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 10:32:35AM -0300, Gabriel B. wrote:
> > btw. if you are copying in an existing tree of data, give rvmsizer a
> > try. It should be in either /usr/bin or /usr/sbin on the server and
> > works like a df, but gives an estimate on how much RVM would be needed
> > and whether there are any directories that might give you a problem.
> 
> Hum, i runned it today in /vicepa, after a night of filling one of the

It is to be run not on the server but where you have the original copy
of the files.

> big volumes (without errors this time)

Good.

> I already have seven more dirs as full as this one, each has it's own
> volume on the same vicepa partition. if this will one eat 230MB of the
> rmv, 230 * 7= 1610
> So, i'd need 1.6GB?

It means you have to run at least two servers, or server processes,
not sharing data with each other (that is, not counting possible replicas).

> Hum.. i will have a little more than 2M files now and about 2,5M soon
> (soon = before we can set up a dedicated machine with proper
> configuration)

It leads to about the same conclusion.

> Is there any way to have more than 1G rvm? Is it pratical to have 2

Not really. On some platforms you may have more luck than on others.
On Linux you definitely have 1G, do not count with more.
My peculiar shared libraries setup leaves me as little as 768M,
but in more standard environments it is 1G.

I would not recommend experimenting to check the upper limit, you have
to know very well what you are doing, both in the OS and in RVM setup.
Instead you may try to setup two servers, there are some hooks in the
setup scripts for multiple server processes, which I never used.
You will need to allocate a separate ip per server process.

> servers on the same machine? What impact does a rvm as large as 1G (or
> more) have to server performace (daily usage, backups, crash,
> startup)?

It is ok as long as there is enough of the virtual (best of all, physical)
memory, which has to be bigger than RVM, or the sum of RVMs if you run several
servers on the same host.

> Also, what about the LOG? it's used just by the transactions right? if
> i understood what i read from the docs, since i only work with small
> files i should be more than safe with the 20M, right?

The log does not contain file data (neither RVM does, it is metadata there),
so you should be fine with 20M.

Regards,
--
Ivan