Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Improve scaling documentation #2019

Open
slimsag opened this Issue Jan 24, 2019 · 4 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
6 participants
@slimsag
Copy link
Member

slimsag commented Jan 24, 2019

https://github.com/sourcegraph/deploy-sourcegraph/blob/master/docs/scale.md

  • There is no mention of how to scale the symbols service. For ~12k repos we currently advise 4 symbols service replicas.
  • The number of searcher replicas suggested are too high: For ~12k repos we currently advise using 20 searchers, and the suggested amount for that would appear to be more than 20 because for 5k repos we suggest 20.
  • The number of gitserver replicas suggested are too high. For ~12k repos we currently advise using 6 gitservers, and the suggested amount for that would appear to be around ~15 because for 5k repos we suggest 8.

For sourcegraph/server:

  • Here’s another question. We have over 1000 projects. How well can Sourcegraph scale with a single instance? How long until my hardware no longer makes a difference? I currently have Sourcegraph running on an 8-core machine with 16 GB of RAM.
@keegancsmith

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

keegancsmith commented Jan 28, 2019

For things like gitserver, scaling has more to do with traffic than number of repos. For searcher and symbols, we need to scale out by number of repositories for it to be able to handle large unindexed searches.

@nicksnyder

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

nicksnyder commented Jan 28, 2019

Perhaps more relevant info to share would be guidance on how to detect if an instance is under or over scaled instead of a concrete number of replicas.

@sqs sqs added this to the 3.1 milestone Feb 4, 2019

@ggilmore ggilmore modified the milestones: 3.1, 3.2 Feb 12, 2019

@sqs sqs added the roadmap label Feb 19, 2019

@sqs sqs changed the title Outdated scaling numbers Improve scaling documentation Feb 19, 2019

@beyang

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

beyang commented Feb 21, 2019

@ggilmore I wrote up a rough outline of a new scaling guide here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1dBvc_hpovih0fNjb9vHDh3jMPDyfn6Tm_VZ-k1QK6lQ/edit, informed by my experience helping 2 relatively large customers answer scaling questions. Can we discuss in person before you start on this?

(Others are welcome to comment on that doc, as well.)

@sqs sqs assigned beyang and ggilmore and unassigned ggilmore Feb 26, 2019

@ggilmore

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

ggilmore commented Mar 5, 2019

Due to some higher priority issues that came up, I am worried that this is at-risk of not shipping in 3.2. I plan to discuss this with Beyang when he is back in town.

@beyang beyang modified the milestones: 3.2, 3.3 Mar 7, 2019

@beyang beyang referenced this issue Mar 18, 2019

Open

Distribution 3.3 tracking issue #2809

4 of 19 tasks complete
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.