+ Post New Thread
Results 1 to 8 of 8
O/S Deployment Thread, Performance in Technical; I am currently using Fog 0.27 running on Ubuntu 9.04 installed an a VMWare Virtual Machine using 10/100M switch based ...
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    149
    Thank Post
    0
    Thanked 36 Times in 35 Posts
    Rep Power
    18

    Performance

    I am currently using Fog 0.27 running on Ubuntu 9.04 installed an a VMWare Virtual Machine using 10/100M switch based network infrastructure. When uploading or pushing images I am getting around 400-450MiB/min (26.5GB image takes around 1 hour) is this about average for this type of network? Would moving Ubuntu/Fog to a dedicated computer increase this transfer rate any more? Other than replacing all our switches and nics to GBit is there anything else I could try to optimise the transfer rate?

  2. #2

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Hull, UK
    Posts
    256
    Thank Post
    6
    Thanked 13 Times in 13 Posts
    Rep Power
    17
    could be

    Im running a 1gb switch with 1 lan cable and get just under a gig a minute on a 2.5gb image. When i image about 6 this goes down to about 100mb each...some lower

  3. #3

    Ric_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    London
    Posts
    7,590
    Thank Post
    109
    Thanked 762 Times in 593 Posts
    Rep Power
    180
    I have a similar setup using XenServer running on gigabit but a handful of machines image in 20 minutes or so.

    What else are you running from your VM box?

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    England
    Posts
    1,482
    Thank Post
    297
    Thanked 304 Times in 263 Posts
    Rep Power
    82
    For fog it normally takes around 30-40 mins to grab our images (which are in the 8-10gb range) and then around 15mins to deploy them to 15 machines simultaneously. Haven't got around to playing with multicast yet

    This is all on a gigabit switched network with Fog running as a VM within our XenServer farm. If it's just deployment you want to speed up have you considered adding a storage node or two? Having a couple of storage nodes spread around can help to spread the load over a few more servers, and depending on the client connection limits you set possibly increase the number of PCs you can image simultaenously

  5. #5
    Netman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    56.343515, -2.804118
    Posts
    911
    Thank Post
    367
    Thanked 190 Times in 143 Posts
    Rep Power
    54
    We moved our FOG server from Virtual to Physical (as the good people at FOG recommend) and did notice an increase in speed - 50% or so faster IIRC... Our base 10Gb image takes less than 10 minutes now... Gig backbone with 10/100 to desks...

  6. #6
    Cools's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bedfordshire
    Posts
    498
    Thank Post
    24
    Thanked 62 Times in 57 Posts
    Rep Power
    25
    i have a hyper v server with a quad port gb nic Bonded to 4 GB

    i get 985mb a sec data rate restore on 1 pc.
    But i do all the pcs at once all 30 in 45 min.

    more Nics the better..

  7. #7

    john's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    London
    Posts
    10,517
    Thank Post
    1,494
    Thanked 1,050 Times in 919 Posts
    Rep Power
    302
    Quote Originally Posted by Cools View Post
    i have a hyper v server with a quad port gb nic Bonded to 4 GB

    i get 985mb a sec data rate restore on 1 pc.
    But i do all the pcs at once all 30 in 45 min.

    more Nics the better..
    Dreams of Quad Port NIC Bet my LAN would fly with one of those beasts in each server all bonded together, then again the edge switches would let it down at that point and the copper inbetween them

  8. #8

    EduTech's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Reading
    Posts
    5,047
    Thank Post
    160
    Thanked 913 Times in 716 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    Rep Power
    271
    we have a 10gb Fibre Card to our Image Server It Flys! (aswell as the 2 Virtual Machine Hosts) We have 4 spare 10gb Cards in the cupboard that we just cant use because we dont have any more servers yet that will take them pitty! they have been sitting there for well over 3 yrs now lol!

    Xtreme Networks Core FTW!

    Muahaha


SHARE:
+ Post New Thread

Similar Threads

  1. Better Performance - why ?
    By mattx in forum Wireless Networks
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 8th August 2007, 05:25 PM
  2. performance issues with XP
    By tomscaper in forum Windows
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 24th May 2007, 10:27 PM
  3. Site performance.
    By Dos_Box in forum General EduGeek News/Announcements
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 30th November 2006, 08:52 AM
  4. Performance
    By webman in forum ICT KS3 SATS Tests
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 23rd May 2006, 07:53 PM

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •