On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 10:26:46 -0400, user_Jamesday
<user_jamesday(a)myrealbox.com> wrote:
The 4U 6CPU is best for the US side. That's the
main page building site and putting it there
will help everyone who's logged in or getting a non-cached page. Because peak load
times
are different in different parts of the world, the same amount of resources for the
central site
delivers more benefit than dedicating them to any one place.
Yes, resource sharing is the most efficient scheme overall, but there
are other reasons to consider splitting off the European Wikis onto
their own dedicated hardware:
1) Politics/Psychology - Europeans might be more willing to donate if
they knew that their contributions were going straight to the Euro
servers, rather than contributing to "all" Wikis (which really means
contributing to the English Wikis more than anything else).
2) Design Flexibility - Having a completely separate setup on the
other side of the pond would allow (at least in theory) two completely
different configurations. This could be useful for testing and
comparing different architectures in the future.
3) Redundancy - What happens if Something Awful (tm) happens in
Florida? Although we have an army of volunteers making regular
off-site backups of the DB, it would still be nice to have an
already-up-and-running duplicate site in place.
I'm sure there are more reasons.... although it's certainly an open
question whether they outweigh the benefits of resource sharing.
Thoughts?
-Bill Clark