OSM's future. Was: Re: [Openstreetmap] OSM Performance is terrible

[Jonathan McDowell]

On Thu, Feb 02, 2006 at 12:29:57AM +0000, SteveC wrote:
> I and other people here have been quietly looking at _sustainable_ ways
> of getting OSM fast and reliable hosting. Let's look at OSM right now.
> It runs on 5 computers. www, tile, db, backup and dev. All of these
> machines are hosted at the university I went to and worked at. Past
> tense.
> 
> They are for lack of a better word, borrowed. Apart from dev
> which is Nicks. The hosting is also borrowed and the machines sit in an
> office being noisy and annoying people. Given that I'm not there any
> more, questions are starting to arise about these machines.
> 
> Even at 5 OK-spec machines with excellent JANET hosting, it's not that
> fast. So we probably need another 3-5 excellent machines. And these
> machies, for the most part, need to be physically close to each other
> because of the interplay of the database, tile creation and the applet.
> 
> The type of bandwidth we're using is huge. The tile server ships a lot
> of data around, as does www. Commercial hosting would probably run in
> to hundreds of pounds a month.

I think you'll have more luck with offers if you can provide hard
figures.

What spec are the machines currently involved?

What bandwidth is currently being shifted to the outside world (ie not
between machines)? Are there graphs anywhere publically viewable?

J.

-- 
 "This sentence no verb." -- Robin  |       Black Cat Networks Ltd
         Stevens, ox.talk           | http://www.blackcatnetworks.co.uk/
                                    |  UK Web, domain and email hosting