I don't have any experience with dual core yet (my first dual dual core box is scheduled to arrive this week!!). I don't think I'd opt for a dual core in place of 2 single cores. I'm hoping (expecting?) to see an advantage in 2 DC over 2 SC.
As far as SCSI over SATA goes, I exclusively use SATA. It meets my workload needs and I always run in redundant arrays. I like using 3ware cards -- the management interface is the most sensical that I've come across. I've also learned to get chassis with hot swap bays only -- you loose more drives than you'd think and it definitely reduces downtime. SCSI will perform better than SATA, but it will also cost a lot more. If you're going to run a non-redundant array, go SCSI -- they do tend to stand up better over time. I'd also think about your environment -- what do the other systems use? What are the other admins comfortable with? If everything else is SCSI, it probably means you have a bunch of spare SCSI drives sitting around and a supplier that gives you a deal. You still haven't outlined what your applications requirements are, so it's hard to say for sure. On 12/13/05, James Harvard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thanks for all the feedback on this. > > Is there any received wisdom on whether 1 dual core processor is better than > 2 'normal' processors? > > Also, is there any advantage to SCSI over SATA? > > TIA, > James Harvard > > -- > MySQL General Mailing List > For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql > To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
