RE: Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM
-Original Message- From: Russ [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] The hd is an obvious bottleneck. If you really want to boost I/O, look into some of the good Opteron systems that use the nForce Professional chipsets, they have much better I/O than the comparable Intel x86 systems. Couple the good I/O with a PCI-X SCSI card and you'll be screaming. Just don't use any of the built-in Windows RAID abilities, they suck for performance. Also, you don't say how much load the server would be under. How many concurrent sessions would you expect to receive? Also, is your data mostly static or mostly dynamic? -- Damien McKenna - Web Developer - [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Limu Company - http://www.thelimucompany.com/ - 407-804-1014 #include stdjoke.h ~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:230133 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM
I'm not so sure about that. Check wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redundant_array_of_independent_disks#RAID_1 It states that with Raid 1 (mirror) the write speed is the same as a single disk, and the read speed is doubled (because each disk in the mirror can be accessed individually). Seek time is also halved. Russ -Original Message- From: John Paul Ashenfelter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 6:23 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM On 1/18/06, Baz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Good call. Actually, a *mirror* RAID array is *slower*, all other things being equal. Two writes instead of 1, though certain controllers make the overhead *very* small. Reads, not so different. If you're after pure speed, you want a RAID *stripe* -- eg RAID 0, which spreads data access across 2 or more drives with a corresponding increase in speed. All that said, while YMMV, 2gb is gonna put all but the most enormous and session-variable-intensive web sites into RAM, so the HD hit is minimal. But I'd still get RAID w/o even thinking twice -- more flexibility for either redundancy (RAID 1, 5, 10) or speed (RAID 0) -Original Message- From: Russ [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 3:06 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM The hd is an obvious bottleneck. That's usually the slowest point in your system. I would use a SCSI or at least a SATA drive, and then probably for good measure set it up a mirror RAID array (that way you get better performance. Russ -Original Message- From: Baz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 2:49 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM If I installed: - CFMX7 Enterprise - MySQL 5.0 On the following machine: - Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM Am I making good use of the hardware? Can both technologies fully utilize the CPU and RAM? Any obvious bottlenecks, perhaps add another GB of ram? Cheers, Baz ~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:229979 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM
It states that with Raid 1 (mirror) the write speed is the same I cant see where it says that? Maybe a case of temporary blindness on my part, or maybe John has just edited the encyclopedia -Original Message- From: Russ [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 19 January 2006 16:21 To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM I'm not so sure about that. Check wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redundant_array_of_independent_disks#RAID_1 It states that with Raid 1 (mirror) the write speed is the same as a single disk, and the read speed is doubled (because each disk in the mirror can be accessed individually). Seek time is also halved. Russ -Original Message- From: John Paul Ashenfelter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 6:23 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM On 1/18/06, Baz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Good call. Actually, a *mirror* RAID array is *slower*, all other things being equal. Two writes instead of 1, though certain controllers make the overhead *very* small. Reads, not so different. If you're after pure speed, you want a RAID *stripe* -- eg RAID 0, which spreads data access across 2 or more drives with a corresponding increase in speed. All that said, while YMMV, 2gb is gonna put all but the most enormous and session-variable-intensive web sites into RAM, so the HD hit is minimal. But I'd still get RAID w/o even thinking twice -- more flexibility for either redundancy (RAID 1, 5, 10) or speed (RAID 0) -Original Message- From: Russ [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 3:06 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM The hd is an obvious bottleneck. That's usually the slowest point in your system. I would use a SCSI or at least a SATA drive, and then probably for good measure set it up a mirror RAID array (that way you get better performance. Russ -Original Message- From: Baz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 2:49 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM If I installed: - CFMX7 Enterprise - MySQL 5.0 On the following machine: - Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM Am I making good use of the hardware? Can both technologies fully utilize the CPU and RAM? Any obvious bottlenecks, perhaps add another GB of ram? Cheers, Baz ~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:229989 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM
Like RAID 0 the average seek time is reduced by half when randomly reading but because each disk has the exact same data the requested sectors can always be split evenly between the disks and the seek time remains low. The transfer rate would also be doubled So, double the transfer rate, and half the seek time. -Original Message- From: Kerry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2006 11:55 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM It states that with Raid 1 (mirror) the write speed is the same I cant see where it says that? Maybe a case of temporary blindness on my part, or maybe John has just edited the encyclopedia -Original Message- From: Russ [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 19 January 2006 16:21 To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM I'm not so sure about that. Check wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redundant_array_of_independent_disks#RAID_1 It states that with Raid 1 (mirror) the write speed is the same as a single disk, and the read speed is doubled (because each disk in the mirror can be accessed individually). Seek time is also halved. Russ -Original Message- From: John Paul Ashenfelter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 6:23 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM On 1/18/06, Baz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Good call. Actually, a *mirror* RAID array is *slower*, all other things being equal. Two writes instead of 1, though certain controllers make the overhead *very* small. Reads, not so different. If you're after pure speed, you want a RAID *stripe* -- eg RAID 0, which spreads data access across 2 or more drives with a corresponding increase in speed. All that said, while YMMV, 2gb is gonna put all but the most enormous and session-variable-intensive web sites into RAM, so the HD hit is minimal. But I'd still get RAID w/o even thinking twice -- more flexibility for either redundancy (RAID 1, 5, 10) or speed (RAID 0) -Original Message- From: Russ [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 3:06 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM The hd is an obvious bottleneck. That's usually the slowest point in your system. I would use a SCSI or at least a SATA drive, and then probably for good measure set it up a mirror RAID array (that way you get better performance. Russ -Original Message- From: Baz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 2:49 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM If I installed: - CFMX7 Enterprise - MySQL 5.0 On the following machine: - Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM Am I making good use of the hardware? Can both technologies fully utilize the CPU and RAM? Any obvious bottlenecks, perhaps add another GB of ram? Cheers, Baz ~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:229990 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM
I'm sorry you asked about write speed: When writing, the array performs like a single disk as all mirrors must be written with the data. I'm sure there is some overhead, but it should be negligible. Russ -Original Message- From: Kerry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2006 11:55 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM It states that with Raid 1 (mirror) the write speed is the same I cant see where it says that? Maybe a case of temporary blindness on my part, or maybe John has just edited the encyclopedia -Original Message- From: Russ [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 19 January 2006 16:21 To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM I'm not so sure about that. Check wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redundant_array_of_independent_disks#RAID_1 It states that with Raid 1 (mirror) the write speed is the same as a single disk, and the read speed is doubled (because each disk in the mirror can be accessed individually). Seek time is also halved. Russ -Original Message- From: John Paul Ashenfelter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 6:23 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM On 1/18/06, Baz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Good call. Actually, a *mirror* RAID array is *slower*, all other things being equal. Two writes instead of 1, though certain controllers make the overhead *very* small. Reads, not so different. If you're after pure speed, you want a RAID *stripe* -- eg RAID 0, which spreads data access across 2 or more drives with a corresponding increase in speed. All that said, while YMMV, 2gb is gonna put all but the most enormous and session-variable-intensive web sites into RAM, so the HD hit is minimal. But I'd still get RAID w/o even thinking twice -- more flexibility for either redundancy (RAID 1, 5, 10) or speed (RAID 0) -Original Message- From: Russ [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 3:06 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM The hd is an obvious bottleneck. That's usually the slowest point in your system. I would use a SCSI or at least a SATA drive, and then probably for good measure set it up a mirror RAID array (that way you get better performance. Russ -Original Message- From: Baz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 2:49 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM If I installed: - CFMX7 Enterprise - MySQL 5.0 On the following machine: - Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM Am I making good use of the hardware? Can both technologies fully utilize the CPU and RAM? Any obvious bottlenecks, perhaps add another GB of ram? Cheers, Baz ~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:229991 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM
Not so fast if you are using SCSI it would be negligable, but if this is an IDE raid array, then write time would be slower due to synchronous calls -Original Message- From: Kerry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2006 10:55 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM It states that with Raid 1 (mirror) the write speed is the same I cant see where it says that? Maybe a case of temporary blindness on my part, or maybe John has just edited the encyclopedia -Original Message- From: Russ [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 19 January 2006 16:21 To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM I'm not so sure about that. Check wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redundant_array_of_independent_disks#RAID_1 It states that with Raid 1 (mirror) the write speed is the same as a single disk, and the read speed is doubled (because each disk in the mirror can be accessed individually). Seek time is also halved. Russ -Original Message- From: John Paul Ashenfelter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 6:23 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM On 1/18/06, Baz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Good call. Actually, a *mirror* RAID array is *slower*, all other things being equal. Two writes instead of 1, though certain controllers make the overhead *very* small. Reads, not so different. If you're after pure speed, you want a RAID *stripe* -- eg RAID 0, which spreads data access across 2 or more drives with a corresponding increase in speed. All that said, while YMMV, 2gb is gonna put all but the most enormous and session-variable-intensive web sites into RAM, so the HD hit is minimal. But I'd still get RAID w/o even thinking twice -- more flexibility for either redundancy (RAID 1, 5, 10) or speed (RAID 0) -Original Message- From: Russ [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 3:06 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM The hd is an obvious bottleneck. That's usually the slowest point in your system. I would use a SCSI or at least a SATA drive, and then probably for good measure set it up a mirror RAID array (that way you get better performance. Russ -Original Message- From: Baz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 2:49 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM If I installed: - CFMX7 Enterprise - MySQL 5.0 On the following machine: - Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM Am I making good use of the hardware? Can both technologies fully utilize the CPU and RAM? Any obvious bottlenecks, perhaps add another GB of ram? Cheers, Baz ~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:229997 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM
The point is with a web system, over 90% of the calls would be reads. Russ -Original Message- From: Mark A Kruger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2006 12:39 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM Not so fast if you are using SCSI it would be negligable, but if this is an IDE raid array, then write time would be slower due to synchronous calls -Original Message- From: Kerry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2006 10:55 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM It states that with Raid 1 (mirror) the write speed is the same I cant see where it says that? Maybe a case of temporary blindness on my part, or maybe John has just edited the encyclopedia -Original Message- From: Russ [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 19 January 2006 16:21 To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM I'm not so sure about that. Check wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redundant_array_of_independent_disks#RAID_1 It states that with Raid 1 (mirror) the write speed is the same as a single disk, and the read speed is doubled (because each disk in the mirror can be accessed individually). Seek time is also halved. Russ -Original Message- From: John Paul Ashenfelter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 6:23 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM On 1/18/06, Baz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Good call. Actually, a *mirror* RAID array is *slower*, all other things being equal. Two writes instead of 1, though certain controllers make the overhead *very* small. Reads, not so different. If you're after pure speed, you want a RAID *stripe* -- eg RAID 0, which spreads data access across 2 or more drives with a corresponding increase in speed. All that said, while YMMV, 2gb is gonna put all but the most enormous and session-variable-intensive web sites into RAM, so the HD hit is minimal. But I'd still get RAID w/o even thinking twice -- more flexibility for either redundancy (RAID 1, 5, 10) or speed (RAID 0) -Original Message- From: Russ [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 3:06 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM The hd is an obvious bottleneck. That's usually the slowest point in your system. I would use a SCSI or at least a SATA drive, and then probably for good measure set it up a mirror RAID array (that way you get better performance. Russ -Original Message- From: Baz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 2:49 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM If I installed: - CFMX7 Enterprise - MySQL 5.0 On the following machine: - Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM Am I making good use of the hardware? Can both technologies fully utilize the CPU and RAM? Any obvious bottlenecks, perhaps add another GB of ram? Cheers, Baz ~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:22 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM
If I installed: - CFMX7 Enterprise - MySQL 5.0 On the following machine: - Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM Am I making good use of the hardware? Can both technologies fully utilize the CPU and RAM? Any obvious bottlenecks, perhaps add another GB of ram? Cheers, Baz ~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:229913 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM
The hd is an obvious bottleneck. That's usually the slowest point in your system. I would use a SCSI or at least a SATA drive, and then probably for good measure set it up a mirror RAID array (that way you get better performance. Russ -Original Message- From: Baz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 2:49 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM If I installed: - CFMX7 Enterprise - MySQL 5.0 On the following machine: - Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM Am I making good use of the hardware? Can both technologies fully utilize the CPU and RAM? Any obvious bottlenecks, perhaps add another GB of ram? Cheers, Baz ~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:229915 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
RE: Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM
Good call. -Original Message- From: Russ [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 3:06 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM The hd is an obvious bottleneck. That's usually the slowest point in your system. I would use a SCSI or at least a SATA drive, and then probably for good measure set it up a mirror RAID array (that way you get better performance. Russ -Original Message- From: Baz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 2:49 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM If I installed: - CFMX7 Enterprise - MySQL 5.0 On the following machine: - Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM Am I making good use of the hardware? Can both technologies fully utilize the CPU and RAM? Any obvious bottlenecks, perhaps add another GB of ram? Cheers, Baz ~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:229917 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
Re: Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM
On 1/18/06, Baz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Good call. Actually, a *mirror* RAID array is *slower*, all other things being equal. Two writes instead of 1, though certain controllers make the overhead *very* small. Reads, not so different. If you're after pure speed, you want a RAID *stripe* -- eg RAID 0, which spreads data access across 2 or more drives with a corresponding increase in speed. All that said, while YMMV, 2gb is gonna put all but the most enormous and session-variable-intensive web sites into RAM, so the HD hit is minimal. But I'd still get RAID w/o even thinking twice -- more flexibility for either redundancy (RAID 1, 5, 10) or speed (RAID 0) -Original Message- From: Russ [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 3:06 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM The hd is an obvious bottleneck. That's usually the slowest point in your system. I would use a SCSI or at least a SATA drive, and then probably for good measure set it up a mirror RAID array (that way you get better performance. Russ -Original Message- From: Baz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 2:49 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM If I installed: - CFMX7 Enterprise - MySQL 5.0 On the following machine: - Dual Xeon 3.06 GHz - 120 GB IDE HD - 2 GB RAM Am I making good use of the hardware? Can both technologies fully utilize the CPU and RAM? Any obvious bottlenecks, perhaps add another GB of ram? Cheers, Baz ~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:229951 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
