What's the MAXIMUM amount of data that a server can hammer out?

Groo Vee

unread,

Dec 12, 2020, 5:52:36 AM12/12/20

to

If I have the best CPU money can buy today, and the best SSD and best mobo - what is the maximum amount of data that a server can currently serve, assuming a static file (file.html) is being read from disk and sent straight to network, without "processing" of any kind? (i.e. "CGI scripts" or "PHP" etc - BACKENDS of any kind). I ask because there is a choice between a mobo with a 1GBps ethernet interface, and a 10 GBps one - if the server cannot shovel OUT data @ more than 1 GBps, it makes no sense to get the faster one.

Thanks.

Jorgen Grahn

unread,

Dec 12, 2020, 10:05:40 AM12/12/20

to

Do you have a /need/ to serve static data at 1 Gbps? Do you have a
more-than-gigabit connection to someone who is interested in getting
that data?

It's an interesting and relevant question, but your use case seems
weak.

/Jorgen

--
// Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . .
\X/ snipabacken.se> O o .

Grant Taylor

unread,

Dec 12, 2020, 2:48:10 PM12/12/20

to

Removing processing of any kind will actually slow things down.

It's possible to read /more/ data (counted as uncompressed bytes) per
second if they are read as compressed data off of the disk and then
uncompressed by the CPU. Resulting in more throughput than if the data
wasn't compressed.

Likewise with the CPU applying the deflate compression to data before it
goes out the network card.

I work with servers that serve 9-10 Gbps per rack unit. 1U servers are
serving 9.2-9.3 Gbps. 2U servers are serving 19+ Gbps. Multiples of
these servers are saturating 100 Gbps uplinks and larger setups are
heavily taxing 2 x 100 Gbps.

> Thanks.

Sure.

--
Grant. . . .
unix || die

William Unruh

unread,

Dec 12, 2020, 3:07:43 PM12/12/20

to

On 2020-12-12, Groo Vee <gro...@cyberdude.com> wrote:
> If I have the best CPU money can buy today, and the best SSD and best mobo - what is the maximum amount of data that a server can currently serve, assuming a static file (file.html) is being read from disk and sent straight to network, without "processing" of any kind? (i.e. "CGI scripts" or "PHP" etc - BACKENDS of any kind). I ask because there is a choice between a mobo with a 1GBps ethernet interface, and a 10 GBps one - if the server cannot shovel OUT data @ more than 1 GBps, it makes no sense to get the faster one.

Ethernets are rated at bits per second (Gbps) not bytes per second
(GBps). Also if the computer is capable of faster behaviour it can use
some of that to, for example, compress the data being sent out,
resulting in a higher throughput. Thus for example, a computer capable
of 100MB/s on a 1Gbps network matches the rate of the network, but a
computer capable of 1GB/s can use the extra factor of 10 to compress the
data and thus (say one acieves a 10-1 compression) achieve a 10Gbps rate over a 1Gbps network.
(Note that this is pretty optimistic. If the data is all encrypted then
the compression ratio will at best be 1 (no compression) so your
analysis would be right. If the data were lineart pictures with loads of
white and a bit of black. a 10 times compression could be possible. So,
it depends.
But yes, it can make sense to shell out for the faster one, even with
the slower ethernet interface.
>
>
> Thanks.

Groo Vee

unread,

Dec 15, 2020, 7:30:10 AM12/15/20

to

On Sunday, 13 December 2020 at 01:18:10 UTC+5:30, Grant Taylor wrote:

>
> I work with servers that serve 9-10 Gbps per rack unit. 1U servers are
> serving 9.2-9.3 Gbps. 2U servers are serving 19+ Gbps. Multiples of
> these servers are saturating 100 Gbps uplinks and larger setups are
> heavily taxing 2 x 100 Gbps.

What are they serving, out of curiosity? Video?

Grant Taylor

unread,

Dec 15, 2020, 11:39:31 AM12/15/20

to

On 12/15/20 5:30 AM, Groo Vee wrote:
> What are they serving, out of curiosity? Video?

Sorry, I'm not at liberty to say.