View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
tma
Joined: 03 May 2007 Posts: 1414 Location: Australia
|
Posted: Tue May 29, 2007 3:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
JCirri wrote: | So I'll need to transfer the DNS and run both the web and database locally on the new machine. This will likely mean some downtime for the site during DNS propagation. |
To reduce the downtime, set the TTL on the A record(s) to a very low value, say 300 seconds (5 mins), NOW, and wait the current TTL x 2 to allow the new TTL to propagate out. Then your changeover will only take 10 mins (TTL x 2). After it's all settled you can put your TTLs back to normal (typically it's a day). I hope that makes sense.
I'm a system administrator by day and deal with DNS regularly. Let me know if you need any clarification. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
JCirri
Joined: 04 Feb 2006 Posts: 4576
|
Posted: Tue May 29, 2007 3:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
Very good idea, I will make that change now. Thanks. _________________
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
thecaptainof
Joined: 04 May 2007 Posts: 7571 Location: ¯\(°_o)/¯
|
Posted: Tue May 29, 2007 3:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
JCirri wrote: | Ok, I've now got the new server and for those who have been asking it's a 2x Dual Core AMD Opteron 2216 (2 x 2 x 2.4 GHz) with 8 GB RAM. The machine is setup and mostly configured with a test copy of the site currently running with upgraded database software (MySQL 5.0). It's much faster, but still not fast enough and I'd like to take this opportunity of having a test environment without any user load to make a number of additional modifications to the system to make it even faster.
Additionally, the new machine is unfortunately in a different physical location than the current machine such that the network latency between them is 40ms. This pretty much rules out my original plan to keep the web server on the old machine and access the database remotely. So I'll need to transfer the DNS and run both the web and database locally on the new machine. This will likely mean some downtime for the site during DNS propagation.
After another day or two of testing and benchmarking I will make another announcement with my final plan before proceeding. |
I'm not gonna pretend I know what any of that means, but thanks for the update dude. _________________
yksi-kaksi-kolme wrote: | Wow Mr. Mad, who fucked your buffalo? |
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
JCirri
Joined: 04 Feb 2006 Posts: 4576
|
Posted: Tue May 29, 2007 3:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Well my interface through 1&1 apparently doesn't allow me to update the SOA record, so I can't change the TTL. But after thinking a bit, I should be able to eliminate the downtime by having a simple redirect page to the new IP until the DNS changes propogate completely. _________________
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
tma
Joined: 03 May 2007 Posts: 1414 Location: Australia
|
Posted: Tue May 29, 2007 3:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
JCirri wrote: | Well my interface through 1&1 apparently doesn't allow me to update the SOA record, so I can't change the TTL. But after thinking a bit, I should be able to eliminate the downtime by having a simple redirect page to the new IP until the DNS changes propogate completely. |
DNS records can have their own TTLs independent of the SOA TTL. You may be able to set it that way instead.
If you redirect to the IP make sure that ScoreHero is the default site for the new web server otherwise it'll get confused. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
stephit
Joined: 29 Apr 2007 Posts: 849 Location: England, Somerset
|
Posted: Tue May 29, 2007 8:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
JCirri wrote: | Ok, I've now got the new server and for those who have been asking it's a 2x Dual Core AMD Opteron 2216 (2 x 2 x 2.4 GHz) with 8 GB RAM. The machine is setup and mostly configured with a test copy of the site currently running with upgraded database software (MySQL 5.0). It's much faster, but still not fast enough and I'd like to take this opportunity of having a test environment without any user load to make a number of additional modifications to the system to make it even faster.
Additionally, the new machine is unfortunately in a different physical location than the current machine such that the network latency between them is 40ms. This pretty much rules out my original plan to keep the web server on the old machine and access the database remotely. So I'll need to transfer the DNS and run both the web and database locally on the new machine. This will likely mean some downtime for the site during DNS propagation.
After another day or two of testing and benchmarking I will make another announcement with my final plan before proceeding. |
what was the old server stats?
and is the new server up and running on the site now? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
eXcelon969
Joined: 26 Sep 2006 Posts: 1564 Location: Phoenix, AZ
|
Posted: Tue May 29, 2007 3:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
kicked in another 57$ to get me back on the main page (top 5) and give JC some money for energy drinks / pizza / etc to get this thing going!! _________________
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
MaximusDM
Joined: 13 Feb 2006 Posts: 876 Location: Massapequa, New York
|
Posted: Tue May 29, 2007 5:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Is that server up because this website is zooming.
Well it was at the time of post. Not so much anymore though. :( _________________
Last edited by MaximusDM on Tue May 29, 2007 7:03 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Torchy
Joined: 13 Jan 2007 Posts: 2402 Location: Indiana / Kentucky, U.S.A. (or aboard U.S.S. Moisthero)
|
Posted: Tue May 29, 2007 5:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
JCirri wrote: | Ok, I've now got the new server and for those who have been asking it's a 2x Dual Core AMD Opteron 2216 (2 x 2 x 2.4 GHz) with 8 GB RAM. The machine is setup and mostly configured with a test copy of the site currently running with upgraded database software (MySQL 5.0). It's much faster, but still not fast enough and I'd like to take this opportunity of having a test environment without any user load to make a number of additional modifications to the system to make it even faster.
Additionally, the new machine is unfortunately in a different physical location than the current machine such that the network latency between them is 40ms. This pretty much rules out my original plan to keep the web server on the old machine and access the database remotely. So I'll need to transfer the DNS and run both the web and database locally on the new machine. This will likely mean some downtime for the site during DNS propagation.
After another day or two of testing and benchmarking I will make another announcement with my final plan before proceeding. |
Uhhh....
-thumbs up, blank stare- K _________________
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
DyersEve
Joined: 15 Nov 2006 Posts: 345 Location: Dallas, Texas
|
Posted: Tue May 29, 2007 9:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It's not much but I just made my first donation of $20, now I can get the status image and can't wait for the new server. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
juniormint84
Joined: 11 Mar 2007 Posts: 469
|
Posted: Wed May 30, 2007 4:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Torchy wrote: | JCirri wrote: | Ok, I've now got the new server and for those who have been asking it's a 2x Dual Core AMD Opteron 2216 (2 x 2 x 2.4 GHz) with 8 GB RAM. The machine is setup and mostly configured with a test copy of the site currently running with upgraded database software (MySQL 5.0). It's much faster, but still not fast enough and I'd like to take this opportunity of having a test environment without any user load to make a number of additional modifications to the system to make it even faster.
Additionally, the new machine is unfortunately in a different physical location than the current machine such that the network latency between them is 40ms. This pretty much rules out my original plan to keep the web server on the old machine and access the database remotely. So I'll need to transfer the DNS and run both the web and database locally on the new machine. This will likely mean some downtime for the site during DNS propagation.
After another day or two of testing and benchmarking I will make another announcement with my final plan before proceeding. |
Uhhh....
-thumbs up, blank stare- K |
Ditto. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
JayHL
Joined: 11 Jan 2007 Posts: 180
|
Posted: Wed May 30, 2007 6:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
That is so metal. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
JCirri
Joined: 04 Feb 2006 Posts: 4576
|
Posted: Wed May 30, 2007 11:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
eXcelon969 wrote: | kicked in another 57$ to get me back on the main page (top 5) and give JC some money for energy drinks / pizza / etc to get this thing going!! |
Haha, thanks. I could very well use some more caffeine these last few days.
I've been working nonstop on a major structural change to the database which has shown absolutely amazing performance benefits without sacrificing any dynamic content. If everything works as planned, I think you will all be very pleased with the result. The end is in sight, and I'll post more information when it's complete.
/back to work _________________
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
CrackerRiley
Joined: 23 Mar 2006 Posts: 3085
|
Posted: Wed May 30, 2007 4:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
getting excited!!
edit: whoa, 1500th post... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
methinkso
Joined: 13 Feb 2007 Posts: 321
|
Posted: Wed May 30, 2007 5:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That's awesome. When it comes time to integrate the new server, do you have any estimate of how much down-time there'll be (either the score database and/or forums)? _________________
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|