|
|
Post by benjamin1 on Jun 5, 2009 1:20:32 GMT -5
Hi,
I'm playing around with RB on a home server. I found this program call WAPT 5.0 . I used it to run a test on my server. I had it simulate 20 users using a program on my server at the same time. I used the hangman sample program as my test application. The server did well up until about 18 users. At the 20 mark the average page response jumped up to about 12.2 seconds average for each user. I logged onto the server while the test was running and tried to use the hangman program myself. The response time for page loads was very slow, one page never even updated until the test stopped.
I am wondering if anyone else had tried a similar test and if anyone thinks the slow page load was RB, my server speed itself, Internet connection, or probably a combination of all. I have a cable modem connection that tests pretty fast when I run a speed test on it. I was thinking of running a server from my home using RB, but if it starts to falter at 20 users, could it really handle 100's of users? assuming I had the proper bandwidth going.
update: I ran the same test on the runbasic.com site and the page response time went down to 2 seconds average. I guess my home server stress test does not show what a real server could handle. Ok I know now that I can use my home server for testing, but will have to switch to rent space on a pro server later.
|
|
|
|
Post by StefanPendl on Jun 5, 2009 3:31:53 GMT -5
The runbasic.com site is a server at Carl's home.
He has posted the specs somewhere, I think.
You should be able to find them by searching the forum.
|
|
|
|
Post by votan on Jun 5, 2009 7:19:32 GMT -5
I'm most certanly sure, that his is caused by either your routers internal firewall or your homeservers firewall. The amount of incoming hits is considered a "possible attack" for home networks and so the router/firewall starts to block incoming requests or simply can't handle it. In my case, my router even completely resets itself when reaching 50 simultanous incoming requests.
|
|
|
|
Post by benjamin1 on Jun 5, 2009 18:18:36 GMT -5
well, I think it might be my router as you say, it is about 6 years old. I'm looking for a new one now so I can test again. The server i'm using is an old PII 800mhz dual processor pc. It's running windows xp pro on it right now, I may change it to 2000 or maybe even download a demo of Micorosft home server. Linux is a possibility, but I'll think about that later. I also got a Netfinity 4000r server from my work. They were throwing it out, can you believe that? ;D I might try to implement that too.
|
|
|
|
Post by Carl Gundel - admin on Jun 5, 2009 20:29:01 GMT -5
well, I think it might be my router as you say, it is about 6 years old. I'm looking for a new one now so I can test again. The server i'm using is an old PII 800mhz dual processor pc. It's running windows xp pro on it right now, I may change it to 2000 or maybe even download a demo of Micorosft home server. Linux is a possibility, but I'll think about that later. I also got a Netfinity 4000r server from my work. They were throwing it out, can you believe that? ;D I might try to implement that too. My server is a 2.2GHz Athlon 64 with 1GB of RAM. This is not a slow machine, but this would not be an expensive configuration nowadays. It is a lot faster than a PII. How much memory does your machine have? -Carl |
|
|
|
Post by benjamin1 on Jun 8, 2009 11:38:18 GMT -5
It currently has only 500mb, I think the board maxes out at 1gb, I'll add some and try my test again.
|
|
|
|
Post by zoomkat on Jun 13, 2009 11:52:54 GMT -5
What was the cpu useage on the server machine while you were running your test? Were you getting low memory alerts? Also note that testing on a lan may be significantly different than testing with a connection across the internet. The below link will allow you to test your upload speed, which will probably be a limiting factor. www.speakeasy.net/speedtest/ |
|
|
|
Post by benjamin1 on Jun 14, 2009 23:18:24 GMT -5
Hello,
here are my results,
Download Speed: 10189 kbps (1273.6 KB/sec transfer rate)
Upload Speed: 968 kbps (121 KB/sec transfer rate)
looks like I'm being cut off by my ISP on my upload speed. I think that might be the cause of my test. When I ran my test I was using another PC in my house, but I was connecting to the server through my outside ip address. So I was going out to the Internet and then back into my server from the Internet.
|
|
|
|
Post by Carl Gundel - admin on Jun 17, 2009 21:52:35 GMT -5
Hello, here are my results, Download Speed: 10189 kbps (1273.6 KB/sec transfer rate) Upload Speed: 968 kbps (121 KB/sec transfer rate) looks like I'm being cut off by my ISP on my upload speed. I think that might be the cause of my test. When I ran my test I was using another PC in my house, but I was connecting to the server through my outside ip address. So I was going out to the Internet and then back into my server from the Internet. Your upload speed isn't really too slow I'm thinking, unless of course you're serving very large pages or graphics. Try stress testing your server running two different apps; one very simple hello world app and one more complex like a runWiki with a home page displaying a bunch of graphics. This way you can get a sense for how page complexity affects performance. Complex pages that have lots of graphics may benefit from running RB behind Apache. This will allow RB to serve up the dynamic content (the pages), and Apache will serve up the static files (like graphics) which is something Apache is optimized for, and this takes some load off of the RB server. Of course the important question is, does your system seem slow to you when you use it? Also, how many people will use your application simultaneously? If only three or four people will ever be using it at once, then is it important to be able to support a dozen users? -Carl |
|
|
|
Post by benjamin1 on Jul 9, 2009 11:21:41 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by mackrackit on Jul 9, 2009 23:53:39 GMT -5
Thanks, I gave it a try and is pretty interesting. Now I have numbers to prove how bad my connection is  |
|
|
|
Post by trenatos on Sept 8, 2011 19:19:06 GMT -5
I know this is an older thread, just wanted to drop my .02
The responsiveness is dependant on a number of things.
In short though, running a server at your home is severly limited compared to a business or professional (Server Hall) network setup.
My suggestion for someone wanting to run a fairly solid server fairly cheap is to look for a used Xeon based server with 1-2 gigs of ram on a lean linux server distro.
Make sure you have a business rate internet connection (The cheapest ones have much better upload capabilities then a "normal" connection.)
Many ISP's specifically prohibit running any kind of server through a normal connection, and they can shut off your connection without warning, or do other things like charge extra or limit the connection speed.
I wonder if anyone would be interested in cheap pre-installed linux servers set up with RB ready to go out of the box?
|
|
