mjh-lists-trac-users at liminalflux
Apr 24, 2012, 1:12 PM
Post #4 of 4
> On 14 April 2012 19:21, Scott Gifford <sgifford [at] suspectclass
> <mailto:sgifford [at] suspectclass>> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 10:01 AM, Yves S. Garret
> <yoursurrogategod [at] gmail <mailto:yoursurrogategod [at] gmail>> wrote:
> [ ... ]
> of the requirements that we have is that thousands of people
> should be
> able to use this (there is a large number of people in the company).
> What I would like to know is how well would Trac handle so much
> I haven't done this personally, but since nobody else has weighed
> in, maybe this will be helpful. Performance will probably depend a
> lot on server hardware, etc. Various bits of documentation indicate
> that it will scale much better using Postgres. Here are a few links
> that might be useful:
> If you do some measurements, I'm sure the list would be very
> interested to see them.
Postgres definitely helps. At $work we switched from sqlite to postgres
recently, and upgraded the hardware, because we were hitting the db
locked issue too often and it was starting to take 10-20s to load a page.
I wouldn't set up a trac instance with 1000s of users without postgres
and enough memory to run lots of apache children.
Our current setup is:
* around 50 active users
* 200,000 svn revisions
* 38,000+ tickets
* bitten plugin
running on a dual-core 2Ghz Xeon, 12 Gb memory, 1Tb drive
(The same box is also running a couple of other services).
Trac db is at 1Gb, with 27Gb of attachments.
I'm curious as to what other people's stats are.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Trac Users" group.
To post to this group, send email to trac-users [at] googlegroups
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to trac-users+unsubscribe [at] googlegroups
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/trac-users?hl=en.