Discussion: Happy New Year! Lots to come in 2011!

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • ZYV
    Senior Member
    • Sep 2005
    • 315

    Discussion: Happy New Year! Lots to come in 2011!

    Hi!

    Since it is not possible to post replies in the Announcements section, I decided to go an and create a discussion thread for this announcement here:

    Happy New Year everyone! We look forward to yet another great year and we wish all of you the same! Summary of 2010 2010 was a very busy and exciting year for us. We started off by deploying the LiteSpeed web server on all of our servers (replacing Apache). The results were simply amazing. This has proven to be one of the


    First off, Happy New Year everyone! It's nice to see how Dathorn is getting better and better over time, especially, given that the last year was by no means easy and the years to come probably are not going to be any easier either.

    Once these upgrades are complete you can expect a significant increase in our hosting plan disk quotas across the board.
    Miam-miam-miam!

    Other than that, I actually wonder if the new LiteSpeed infrastructure is going to make it any easier to support custom FCGI / SCGI / UWSGI backends in the future. Not that I am not happy with what I can do now, but using plain CGI clearly prevents anything like Python / Ruby to be used for anything serious other than just playing around...

    Also, is RHEL6-based up-to-date Python / Ruby stack coming out-of-the box?

    I wonder if you did any 32/PAE vs. 64 benchmarks. My hunch would be that the syscall overhead would kill basically kill the benefits of having untranslated memory for shared scenario when there are lots of small processes none of which actually needs / allowed to take that much, so probably 32 is still the way to go?
  • KyleC
    Senior Member
    • Mar 2004
    • 291

    #2
    Really looking forward to the extra space and new control panel.

    Thanks Andrew!
    -Kyle

    Comment

    • AndrewT
      Administrator
      • Mar 2004
      • 3653

      #3
      Thanks guys!

      Originally posted by ZYV
      Other than that, I actually wonder if the new LiteSpeed infrastructure is going to make it any easier to support custom FCGI / SCGI / UWSGI backends in the future. Not that I am not happy with what I can do now, but using plain CGI clearly prevents anything like Python / Ruby to be used for anything serious other than just playing around...
      For Ruby, yes. Python, no (or perhaps not yet). We hope to add proper Ruby support after the servers are upgraded. The concern with it is simply resource usage related. It's just not as performance friendly as PHP on a shared hosting server.

      Originally posted by ZYV
      Also, is RHEL6-based up-to-date Python / Ruby stack coming out-of-the box?

      I wonder if you did any 32/PAE vs. 64 benchmarks. My hunch would be that the syscall overhead would kill basically kill the benefits of having untranslated memory for shared scenario when there are lots of small processes none of which actually needs / allowed to take that much, so probably 32 is still the way to go?
      When we first started setting up the current servers there were still lingering compatibility issues that stopped us from going with 64 bit. The new servers will be 64 bit. They will have quite a bit more RAM.

      We hope to utilize RHEL 6 on the new servers. cPanel is apparently dragging their feet though so we'll see.

      Comment

      • ZYV
        Senior Member
        • Sep 2005
        • 315

        #4
        Originally posted by AndrewT
        It's just not as performance friendly as PHP on a shared hosting server.
        I tend to agree with you, but to my mind it is mostly the profile of a typical client that would want to use these technologies that is more of a problem :-)

        I've lost track of what is being used right now, I guess it must be LS PHP-SAPI, which is performance-wise comparable to PHP-FPM / FastCGI, but for small scripts basically costs nothing. While Django + FastCGI leaves PHP in the dust under high load (from my experience), the initial overhead for small lightly-loaded websites is much higher (and probably unacceptable for mass shared hosting).

        Ok, anyway :-) If there happens to be a solution that is acceptable and slightly better than CGI, I will be very happy, otherwise, we are probably so few that it doesn't make much sense to invest more effort into it. This is perfectly understandable.

        Originally posted by AndrewT
        The new servers will be 64 bit. They will have quite a bit more RAM. We hope to utilize RHEL 6 on the new servers. cPanel is apparently dragging their feet though so we'll see.
        Wow! Up-to-date Python! Pure 64-bit userland! Yay! Best of luck with your endeavors!

        Comment

        Working...