Comments for Musings of an Anonymous Geek http://www.protocolostomy.com Made with only the finest 1's and 0's Mon, 08 Sep 2008 13:32:25 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 Comment on More Adventures in Amazon EC2 (and EBS) by Calvin Spealman http://www.protocolostomy.com/2008/08/27/more-adventures-in-amazon-ec2-and-ebs/#comment-3199 Calvin Spealman Mon, 01 Sep 2008 05:19:45 +0000 http://www.protocolostomy.com/?p=351#comment-3199 Wouldn't it be a better analogy to say an image is a class? An instance is of a class, not an instance of an object. Instance and object are fairly interchangeable. Wouldn’t it be a better analogy to say an image is a class? An instance is of a class, not an instance of an object. Instance and object are fairly interchangeable.

]]> Comment on Design Patterns in System Administration by Steve Loughran http://www.protocolostomy.com/2008/08/03/design-patterns-in-system-administration/#comment-3140 Steve Loughran Fri, 29 Aug 2008 07:55:57 +0000 http://www.protocolostomy.com/?p=348#comment-3140 I'm building a 'patterns of deployment' wiki, where deployment==the act of getting a working system up and running. The focus is mostly on CM-tool deployment (and java apps). And, patterns-style, it likes to look at the disadvantages of various approaches too: http://wiki.smartfrog.org/wiki/display/sf/Patterns+of+Deployment I’m building a ‘patterns of deployment’ wiki, where deployment==the act of getting a working system up and running. The focus is mostly on CM-tool deployment (and java apps). And, patterns-style, it likes to look at the disadvantages of various approaches too: http://wiki.smartfrog.org/wiki/display/sf/Patterns+of+Deployment

]]> Comment on Sustained IO on EBS == No Bueno by m0j0 http://www.protocolostomy.com/2008/08/27/sustained-io-on-ebs-no-bueno/#comment-3105 m0j0 Thu, 28 Aug 2008 13:32:03 +0000 http://www.protocolostomy.com/?p=355#comment-3105 Thanks, PaulM I just tried to launch a large instance a short while ago, but apparently you *must* have an x86_64 image to launch anything bigger than a 'small' instance, which I don't recall seeing in the docs, which is really annoying. Perhaps I just missed it. I did see that article, but also didn't notice the raw device numbers. I'll have another look - thanks! @Mark -- I didn't plan to run *any* benchmarks, to be honest, but when you know how long something should take, and it takes exponentially longer than that, you get... 'inspired'. brian Thanks, PaulM

I just tried to launch a large instance a short while ago, but apparently you *must* have an x86_64 image to launch anything bigger than a ’small’ instance, which I don’t recall seeing in the docs, which is really annoying. Perhaps I just missed it.

I did see that article, but also didn’t notice the raw device numbers. I’ll have another look - thanks!

@Mark — I didn’t plan to run *any* benchmarks, to be honest, but when you know how long something should take, and it takes exponentially longer than that, you get… ‘inspired’.
brian

]]> Comment on Sustained IO on EBS == No Bueno by PaulM http://www.protocolostomy.com/2008/08/27/sustained-io-on-ebs-no-bueno/#comment-3104 PaulM Thu, 28 Aug 2008 13:12:05 +0000 http://www.protocolostomy.com/?p=355#comment-3104 Hey mate, For the raw device numbers go and look at this article http://www.ukd1.co.uk/amazon-ec2-ebs-initial-benchmarks.html I am going to run sysbench myself shortly, Amazon does mention that large and extra large instances with their better network will perform better. Have Fun Paul Hey mate,

For the raw device numbers go and look at this article
http://www.ukd1.co.uk/amazon-ec2-ebs-initial-benchmarks.html

I am going to run sysbench myself shortly, Amazon does mention that large and extra large instances with their better network will perform better.

Have Fun
Paul

]]> Comment on Sustained IO on EBS == No Bueno by Mark Callaghan http://www.protocolostomy.com/2008/08/27/sustained-io-on-ebs-no-bueno/#comment-3093 Mark Callaghan Thu, 28 Aug 2008 03:00:51 +0000 http://www.protocolostomy.com/?p=355#comment-3093 Do you plan to run the sysbench fileio test for concurrent 16kb random reads? I am curious about sustained throughput for random IO. My assumption is that there will be a bit of variation as you have shown for sequential IO. Do you plan to run the sysbench fileio test for concurrent 16kb random reads? I am curious about sustained throughput for random IO. My assumption is that there will be a bit of variation as you have shown for sequential IO.

]]>