[tor-relays] Second relay on same ESX

[Patrick DERWAEL]

Well, I have 100MB guaranteed to the internet and a 1 GIG NIC, the VM CPU
is used at 40% (average)
I guess I will fire a second VM and see what the total bandwidth result
is...

2016-12-11 18:27 GMT+01:00 s7r <s7r at sky-ip.org>:

> Hello,
>
> Thanks for running relays.
>
>
> Patrick DERWAEL wrote:
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > I'm running a relay in a VM on a physical server which is largely under
> used
> > Current advertised bandwidth 26MB, consensus 76500
> > I'm considering running a second relay (2nd VM) on the very same
> > hardware, but this brings a few questions:
> >
> > - is there any issue running it at the same geographical place?
>
> It desirable to have geographical diversity of course, but running two
> in the same place to increase capacity doesn't do any harm. Just don't
> forget to configure MyFamily in both torrcs so that the relays are
> linked together as belonging to the same family.
>
> > - would the current total BW effectively consumed (26MB) be divided in 2
> > (i.e. no added value in BW)?
>
> This depends on a lot of things. If your network port can handle more
> than 26MB, and the limit of 26 MB observed on the first relay comes from
> CPU/RAM, the 26 MB will not be divided but increased. If the first relay
> has underused CPU / RAM this means the 26 MB is a limitation that comes
> from the network port speed, and in this case it will be obviously divided.
>
> > - basically, would it have any significant added value to the network?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
>
> Yes, if the bandwidth grows. If the 26 MB is divided in two, it's easier
> and better to run a single one of 26 MB (save space in descriptors
> distributed network wide, have a single box to maintain and keep up to
> date, etc.)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> tor-relays mailing list
> tor-relays at lists.torproject.org
> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
>
>


-- 

Patrick Derwael
Rue de la fontaine, 3
4210 Burdinne
G:0479.80.50.79
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-relays/attachments/20161212/2cde23a2/attachment.html>