Looking for server benchmarking data

[b_dev]

Hi all,

I'm new to WWJ, both client and server. I've got a pretty good idea of how to go about creating my map caches and installing the WMS server to serve mapping data to my clients (I want to run this on my own LAN, without internet).

Before I get started though, I am trying to find out some rules of thumb for what type of hardware I should attempt to run my WMS server on. I haven't been able to find any resources on the web, so I was hoping someone might have some experience with this.

For example, lets say I wanted to cache different layers of Texas and be able to serve that up to a couple dozen clients running WWJ. I'm not exactly sure which layers I'd like to provide yet, but probably some lansat and elevation data.

Are there any benchmarks that can tell me something along the lines of "for X GB of mapping data, with layers A B and C, connected to Y clients, your WMS server will need this processing speed, and this connection speed".

Basically, I'd like to avoid setting up my server and map caches only to find out that the server I chose is too slow for the amount of processing/throughput needed.

Thanks in advance.

[garakl]

Pls check this document , page 2 (http://forum.worldwindcentral.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=2244&d=1256921393).

http://forum.worldwindcentral.com/showthread.php?t=21951

It shows typical WMS deployment, configured for fail-over with SQUID in front of both WMS servers that acts as a caching solution and a load-balancer.
However, you could deploy a single instance of WMS with or without SQUID.

I develop NASA WMS server on a quad-core machine, with 4GB memory, 32-bit windows 2008 server.
Our goal is to respond to a single WMS GetMap request within 1 second, however most of our layers respond within less than 0.5 sec per request.

While two instances of WMS server on www.nasa.network.com are capable to handle all WWJ requests, however we do have a caching solution (SQUID) in front of our servers.

Networking - 100 mbps minimum, but 1 gigabit networks are pretty common (eh?).

Most important is STORAGE!!! Reliable (RAID5 or RAID6), fast, and lots of it.
For example, each month of BlueMarble New Genereation requires 4GB.
For all 12 month -> 12 x 4GB

LandSAT (aka ESAT) - the behemoth , needs 3.5 TB (source tiles) or tiled cache (prepared by us, World Wind team).

NAIP (1meter, USA only) - 30TB

Elevations:

SRTM30 (900m), SRTM3 (90m), USGS NED (30m) take around 400GB

We use this 4 x 1.5TB NAS box from Thecus (http://www.amazon.com/Bay-Nas-Amd-Pro-Raid/dp/B001JR3MIA)to send to our customers the NASA WMS server pre-configured with the base set of imagery (BMNG+ESAT) and elevations (SRTM30Plus, SRTM3, NED)

The NAS box is pretty amazing - it has a gigabit networking with JUMBO frames support up to 15K (very impressive), four 1.5TB disks (or WD 2TB (http://www.amazon.com/Western-Digital-Intellipower-Desktop-WD20EADS/dp/B001RB1TIS)) should be configured to RAID6 for data integrity and reliability, I have some customers that use the NAS box as the main source of the imagery and elevations.
And of course there are some mobile WMS server versions too.

I must say that I also like QNAP NAS boxes (http://www.newegg.com/Store/BrandSubCategory.aspx?Brand=11165&SubCategory=124&name=QNAP-Network-Storage-NAS).

[m_k]

Wow, really impressive!
So, does NASA WMS run on WWJ server or is it something completely different?

Have you ever compared WWJ with Geoserver or Mapserver? (maybe you should start in the WMS Shootout @ FOSS4G next year;)

[garakl]

www.nasa.network.com runs our WMS server

There are two machines (dual quad-core XEON CPU, 32GB RAM, Solaris 10 64-bit) and two instances of SQUID services configured for failover.
Two storage boxes 16TB each.