RE: [SOT] Server Hard Drives
> But, I have heard that Apple boxes (pre-Xserve) have been > used for years as servers in Universities, and places like > Ford, and some others Anything can be used as a server. You could rack-mount laptops. (I could tell some funny stories at this point, but won't.) However, machines designed as servers typically have a different feature-set than those designed as desktops. Reliability and redundancy are very important in server hardware. > One comment was that SCSI interface to hard drives is better > than ATA IDE interface. > > Why? SCSI supports concurrent requests better than IDE does. In a multitasking environment, like you'd find on a server, this is more important than on the typical desktop, in which the application on the user's screen is typically doing most of the work. > Others said that they would not consider hardware for a > server unless it had RAID. > > Why? > > I can see the desirability of RAID, but: > > Is RAID necessary ... It's not necessary, but it is desirable. It allows a server to continue functioning after a hard drive fails. It can be used with any server (database, application, etc). In addition, it can speed filesystem access. > Do RAIDs normally go in the same box as the server(s) or > they just a separate rack-mount component? Yes, typically, a server will have a hardware RAID controller inside the box (on the motherboard or on an add-on card) and some number of physical disk drives. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 __ Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: [SOT] Server Hard Drives
ahh hardware.. my box of joy :) SCSI has been better because of throughput and disk speed until recently... now its more of a simultaneous channels available to speak to either format... the latest ATA stuff is very comparable with SCSI and costs far less. RAID is an excellent technology for file servers in offices.. online wise it has some performance impact undoubtedly... moreover, your disk wont perform at 100% due to multiple copies and striping info being wrote vs. one file write... People live by RAID... its expensive and fairly a pain in the arse to setup and maintain.. and costly if you are running RAID worth running (see Raid 5)... With a web server you could just copy all files from a CD to a RAM drive in most scenarios... it doesn't get any faster than that.. and it's redundant RAID ideally is good for your database box and logging... although it could fall on its own weight of success with all those spare writes... be sure to get a RAID controller with lots of cache... just in case... and it's own battery backup in case of failures... RAID isn't necessary for anything. RAID can go in the server if you have a nice case... those 1Us hold 1-2 drives so forget that... You can run RAID via SCSI off external backplane connector on your server... Additionally, and how I prefer it... you can get RAID in a NAS or SAN solution... see Maxattach from Maxtor -paris Paris Lundis Founder Areaindex, L.L.C. http://www.areaindex.com http://www.pubcrawler.com (p) 1-212-655-4477 [finding the future in the past, passing the future in the present] [connecting people, places and things] -Original Message- From: Dick Applebaum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, August 02, 2002 4:19 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: [SOT] Server Hard Drives I am not a server-side person, so maybe some of you who are, can help me. In recent posts, and other times in past posts, people have dismissed Apple's Xserve as not ready for prime time as far as servers go. But, I have heard that Apple boxes (pre-Xserve) have been used for years as servers in Universities, and places like Ford, and some others This confuses me -- does Apple know something that others don't, or vice versa? One comment was that SCSI interface to hard drives is better than ATA IDE interface. Why? Others said that they would not consider hardware for a server unless it had RAID. Why? I can see the desirability of RAID, but: Is RAID necessary for an Application Sever, like JRun? Is RAID necessary for an Web application Sever, like CFMX? Is RAID necessary for an Web Sever, like Apache? Is RAID necessary for a Database Server, like MS-SQL? Do all of the above have the ability of deploying on or taking advantage of a RAID? Do RAIDs normally go in the same box as the server(s) or they just a separate rack-mount component? If separate, how do RAIDs interconnect with the other rack-mount boxes? Finally, what would be the configuration of a good, reliable Web Hosting environment that included all the above servers and RAID, look like? TIA Dick TIA Dick __ Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: [SOT] Server Hard Drives
> SCSI supports concurrent requests better than IDE does. In a multitasking > environment, like you'd find on a server, this is more important than on > the > typical desktop, in which the application on the user's screen is > typically > doing most of the work. > This is a myth. -Matt __ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: [SOT] Server Hard Drives
>I have heard that Apple boxes (pre-Xserve) have been used for years >as servers in Universities, and places like Ford, and some others Most certainly. Macs were happily serving up web pages long before there was a decent web server for the Windows platform. I do recall that back in the 1993/94 timeframe Chuck Shotton was busy pumping out MacHTTP to a happy crowd of loyal users. Been a long time since my mind has drifted back to that era, lots of fun to be had in those days...check out http://www.machttp.org/ for more info and history. Of course, none of that is intended to suggest that it's necessarily a better platform for web serving today. No interest in repeating that religious debate anymore. Ken __ This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: [SOT] Server Hard Drives
Theres a hack in the works to get the X-Box to run Linux. Once that's finished, I can imagine racks of $199.00 dns servers, mail servers, etc :-) -Original Message- From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, August 02, 2002 4:34 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: [SOT] Server Hard Drives > But, I have heard that Apple boxes (pre-Xserve) have been > used for years as servers in Universities, and places like > Ford, and some others Anything can be used as a server. You could rack-mount laptops. (I could tell some funny stories at this point, but won't.) However, machines designed as servers typically have a different feature-set than those designed as desktops. Reliability and redundancy are very important in server hardware. > One comment was that SCSI interface to hard drives is better > than ATA IDE interface. > > Why? SCSI supports concurrent requests better than IDE does. In a multitasking environment, like you'd find on a server, this is more important than on the typical desktop, in which the application on the user's screen is typically doing most of the work. > Others said that they would not consider hardware for a > server unless it had RAID. > > Why? > > I can see the desirability of RAID, but: > > Is RAID necessary ... It's not necessary, but it is desirable. It allows a server to continue functioning after a hard drive fails. It can be used with any server (database, application, etc). In addition, it can speed filesystem access. > Do RAIDs normally go in the same box as the server(s) or > they just a separate rack-mount component? Yes, typically, a server will have a hardware RAID controller inside the box (on the motherboard or on an add-on card) and some number of physical disk drives. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 __ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: [SOT] Server Hard Drives
> This is a myth. Which part of that was a myth? __ Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: [SOT] Server Hard Drives
> SCSI has been better because of throughput and disk speed until > recently... > now its more of a simultaneous channels available to speak to either > format... the latest ATA stuff is very comparable with SCSI and costs far > less. > You simply buy more ATA controllers to get comparable performance. > RAID is an excellent technology for file servers in offices.. online wise > it > has some performance impact undoubtedly... moreover, your disk wont > perform > at 100% due to multiple copies and striping info being wrote vs. one file > write... > That is not true for all levels of RAID. Specifically, stripping without parity can result in a significant performance increase. -Matt __ Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: [SOT] Server Hard Drives
Oops! Let me try again. > SCSI supports concurrent requests better than IDE does. > This is a myth. Matt Liotta President & CEO Montara Software, Inc. http://www.montarasoftware.com/ V: 415-577-8070 F: 415-341-8906 P: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -Original Message- > From: Ken Wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, August 02, 2002 1:43 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: [SOT] Server Hard Drives > > > This is a myth. > > > Which part of that was a myth? > > __ Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: [SOT] Server Hard Drives
> In recent posts, and other times in past posts, people have dismissed > Apple's Xserve as not ready for prime time as far as servers go. > They seem quite good to me. > But, I have heard that Apple boxes (pre-Xserve) have been used for years > as servers in Universities, and places like Ford, and some others > Those are bad examples of servers. Generally speaking, the Apple boxes were only used for one of two reasons. First, the people didn't have skills with other operating systems. Or second, the software only worked on a Mac. > This confuses me -- does Apple know something that others don't, or vice > versa? > I think it really comes down to people's opinions on hard drives. > One comment was that SCSI interface to hard drives is better than ATA > IDE interface. > That kind of blanket statement used to be true, but now it really depends. It is possible to have a faster more robust SCSI drive than an ATA, but the opposite is true as well. It all really depends. It should be noted however that the SCSI specification is more strict than the ATA specification, so generally speaking SCSI hard drives are high quality. > Others said that they would not consider hardware for a server unless it > had RAID. > It depends on what the server is doing. Some people setup the web servers with RAID 5, which is about the worst thing you can possibly do performance wise with your disk subsystem for a web server. > Is RAID necessary for an Application Sever, like JRun? > No > Is RAID necessary for an Web application Sever, like CFMX? > No > Is RAID necessary for an Web Sever, like Apache? > No > Is RAID necessary for a Database Server, like MS-SQL? > Yes > Do all of the above have the ability of deploying on or taking advantage > of a RAID? > Generally speaking, all of the above are disk subsystem agnostic. > Do RAIDs normally go in the same box as the server(s) or they just a > separate rack-mount component? > It depends on the size of the server and the number of disks you use. > If separate, how do RAIDs interconnect with the other rack-mount boxes? > SCSI, Fiberchannel, or IP > Finally, what would be the configuration of a good, reliable Web Hosting > environment that included all the above servers and RAID, look like? > It all really depends on what you are looking for. Two cheap servers with no redundancy built-in may be more reliable than one server with redundancy built-in. -Matt __ This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: [SOT] Server Hard Drives
OK, what's stripping? TIA Dick On Friday, August 2, 2002, at 01:34 PM, Matt Liotta wrote: > That is not true for all levels of RAID. Specifically, stripping without > parity can result in a significant performance increase. __ Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: [SOT] Server Hard Drives
It is striping. -Original Message- From: Dick Applebaum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, August 02, 2002 5:02 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: [SOT] Server Hard Drives OK, what's stripping? TIA Dick On Friday, August 2, 2002, at 01:34 PM, Matt Liotta wrote: > That is not true for all levels of RAID. Specifically, stripping without > parity can result in a significant performance increase. __ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: [SOT] Server Hard Drives
yes Matt that's true.. you can add more controllers for ATA... kind of like adding a second engine to make your car go faster... kidding... striping w/o parity... only good version of that would be RAID 0+1... here a RAID brief comparison: http://www.raidweb.com/whatis.html -paris Paris Lundis Founder Areaindex, L.L.C. http://www.areaindex.com http://www.pubcrawler.com (p) 1-212-655-4477 [finding the future in the past, passing the future in the present] [connecting people, places and things] -Original Message- From: Matt Liotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, August 02, 2002 4:34 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: [SOT] Server Hard Drives > SCSI has been better because of throughput and disk speed until > recently... > now its more of a simultaneous channels available to speak to either > format... the latest ATA stuff is very comparable with SCSI and costs far > less. > You simply buy more ATA controllers to get comparable performance. > RAID is an excellent technology for file servers in offices.. online wise > it > has some performance impact undoubtedly... moreover, your disk wont > perform > at 100% due to multiple copies and striping info being wrote vs. one file > write... > That is not true for all levels of RAID. Specifically, stripping without parity can result in a significant performance increase. -Matt __ Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: [SOT] Server Hard Drives
you've never been to a bachelor party? he he Striping puts data on two or more hard drives (actually partitions) where half the data is on one hard drive and the other half on the other. This increases your speed since you use BOTH the hard drives at the same time to get each half of the data jay miller. Dick Applebaum wrote: OK, what's stripping? TIA Dick On Friday, August 2, 2002, at 01:34 PM, Matt Liotta wrote: That is not true for all levels of RAID. Specifically, stripping without parity can result in a significant performance increase. __ This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: [SOT] Server Hard Drives
my drives strip all the time... I even have one of those floor to ceiling pools for them to have fun on... the other day... ahh yeah... Paris Lundis Founder Areaindex, L.L.C. http://www.areaindex.com http://www.pubcrawler.com (p) 1-212-655-4477 [finding the future in the past, passing the future in the present] [connecting people, places and things] -Original Message- From: Bryan F. Hogan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, August 02, 2002 5:07 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: [SOT] Server Hard Drives It is striping. -Original Message- From: Dick Applebaum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, August 02, 2002 5:02 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: [SOT] Server Hard Drives OK, what's stripping? TIA Dick On Friday, August 2, 2002, at 01:34 PM, Matt Liotta wrote: > That is not true for all levels of RAID. Specifically, stripping without > parity can result in a significant performance increase. __ Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: [SOT] Server Hard Drives
Matt Liotta wrote: > Oops! Let me try again. > > >>SCSI supports concurrent requests better than IDE does. >> > > This is a myth. That is not entirely true. The caching strategy used in (extremely fast (eg 10k+)) SCSI harddrives is better for Random Access than for Continues Access. That's one plus for SCSI. That's also why in server work there is no IDE drive that's faster than a SCSi drive. There is however one IDE drive that's faster in Desktop work than most SCSI drives (the new maxtor 120Gb drive with 8Mb cache), Also SCSI devices can communicate at the same time with the controller, and can even communicate with eachother without interference of a controller. This makes them better for concurrent requests. Also SCSI can support more than 2 devices per channel, so you can have more disks in your system, (and dat tape stations and cd-roms and so on...). Also the cache size on SCSI disks is usually larger (eg 8Mb or even 16 Mb instead of 2 or 4 Mb) which makes them also better in handling concurrent requests, as this speeds up Random access. If you want to know more, go to www.storagereview.com and have a look around. Jesse __ Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: [SOT] Server Hard Drives
also - when one drive goes bad - depending on RAID level setup - you don't lose data- you can toss a drive and get all your data back. jay miller Dick Applebaum wrote: OK, what's stripping? TIA Dick On Friday, August 2, 2002, at 01:34 PM, Matt Liotta wrote: That is not true for all levels of RAID. Specifically, stripping without parity can result in a significant performance increase. __ Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: [SOT] Server Hard Drives
On Friday, August 2, 2002, at 02:06 PM, Bryan F. Hogan wrote: > It is striping. > I'll bite, what's striping (as pertains to RAID)? TIA Dick __ This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: [SOT] Server Hard Drives
Sorry for the misspelling. Anyway, striping is the process by which RAID spreads data across drives. This allows read and writes to happen faster because the amount of data that has to be read/written to each drive is less. It is essentially divide and conquer. Each drive can only read/write data so fast, so to increase performance you get a bunch of drives to work together. Matt Liotta President & CEO Montara Software, Inc. http://www.montarasoftware.com/ V: 415-577-8070 F: 415-341-8906 P: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -Original Message- > From: Bryan F. Hogan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, August 02, 2002 2:07 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: [SOT] Server Hard Drives > > It is striping. > > -Original Message- > From: Dick Applebaum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, August 02, 2002 5:02 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: [SOT] Server Hard Drives > > > OK, what's stripping? > > TIA > > Dick > > On Friday, August 2, 2002, at 01:34 PM, Matt Liotta wrote: > > > That is not true for all levels of RAID. Specifically, stripping without > > parity can result in a significant performance increase. > > > __ Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: [SOT] Server Hard Drives
> striping w/o parity... only good version of that would be RAID 0+1... > If you want redundancy and speed than 0+1 (0/1) is the only way to go. However, I only use RAID 0/1 on servers that can't be horizontally scaled. IMHO, any server that can be horizontally scaled can be made more redundant with additional servers, so I only use RAID 0 in that case. -Matt __ Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: [SOT] Server Hard Drives
A Quote from Jay "Striping puts data on two or more hard drives (actually partitions) where half the data is on one hard drive and the other half on the other. This increases your speed since you use BOTH the hard drives at the same time to get each half of the data jay miller." -Original Message- From: Dick Applebaum [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, August 02, 2002 5:15 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: Re: [SOT] Server Hard Drives On Friday, August 2, 2002, at 02:06 PM, Bryan F. Hogan wrote: > It is striping. > I'll bite, what's striping (as pertains to RAID)? TIA Dick __ Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
Re: [SOT] Server Hard Drives
you've never been to a bachelor party? he he Striping puts data on two or more hard drives (actually partitions) where half the data is on one hard drive and the other half on the other. This increases your speed since you use BOTH the hard drives at the same time to get each half of the data jay miller. Dick Applebaum wrote: On Friday, August 2, 2002, at 02:06 PM, Bryan F. Hogan wrote: It is striping. I'll bite, what's striping (as pertains to RAID)? TIA Dick __ This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: [SOT] Server Hard Drives
> Also SCSI devices can communicate at the same time with the controller, > and can even communicate with eachother without interference of a > controller. This makes them better for concurrent requests. > That only makes them better in the case where the host CPU is burdened. Generally speaking this is not true for web servers as they are usually I/O burdened. > Also SCSI can support more than 2 devices per channel, so you can have > more disks in your system, (and dat tape stations and cd-roms and so > on...). > Yes, but you can have as many channels as you like with either technology. > Also the cache size on SCSI disks is usually larger (eg 8Mb or even 16 > Mb instead of 2 or 4 Mb) which makes them also better in handling > concurrent requests, as this speeds up Random access. > That is not a part of either specification. You can get ATA drives with large caches. __ Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: [SOT] Server Hard Drives
> If you want to know more, go to www.storagereview.com > and have a look around. StorageReview.com? You mean the site which has perpetually listed the ATA-100 Western Digital SE drives in the top 5 for just about every performance test for the past 6 months. :) Benjamin S. Rogers http://www.c4.net/ v.508.240.0051 f.508.240.0057 __ Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
RE: [SOT] Server Hard Drives
> One comment was that SCSI interface to hard drives is > better than ATA IDE interface. Why? Such statements need qualifications. In the most generic terms, SCSI RAID solutions generally provide higher performance. It comes as at a cost, however. IDE RAID solutions are much cheaper (both the controllers and the drives) while providing much more disk space. With the 3Ware RAID cards, for example, you can be fully redundancy with terabytes of data for very little money (relatively speaking of course). Some IDE drives, such as the Western Digital SE's, are on par performance wise with a lot of the high end SCSI drivers. Of course, this varies from test to test. In general, IDE drives suffer when it comes to access times, though this has more to do with the size of the drives (i.e. amount of data stored on the drives) than with any limitation inherent in IDE drives. > Others said that they would not consider hardware for a > server unless it had RAID. Why? I can't speak for anyone else, but IDE RAID is so cheap that we use it just about everywhere. About to perform a major upgrade? Unplug a drive and you have an instant way to get back to where you started. Bad drive? No problem. Just replace it. In most cases, you can sync up the drives while the system's serving up web pages. In my mind, the question is when would you not use RAID? Maybe a gaming machine. Even then, it takes me a minimum of a day to install a system, drivers, patches, software etc. Afterwards, I usually spend the next week installing the software I forgot about, customizing the OS, etc. You can have a RAID system for as little as an extra $250. I think my time is worth that. :) > I can see the desirability of RAID, but: > Is RAID necessary for an Application Sever, like JRun? > Is RAID necessary for an Web application Sever, like > CFMX? > Is RAID necessary for an Web Sever, like Apache? > Is RAID necessary for a Database Server, like MS-SQL? No, no, no, no, and no, but I will never run any of those systems without RAID for the reasons mentioned above. > Do all of the above have the ability of deploying on or > taking advantage of a RAID? Yes. The RAID we're talking about happens at the hardware level. As a result, the question really is, "Does my operating system support RAID?" The answer to this question is vendor specific. > Do RAIDs normally go in the same box as the server(s) > or they just a separate rack-mount component? > If separate, how do RAIDs interconnect with the other > rack-mount boxes? A RAID controller (IDE or SCSI) is *generally* a PCI card that you place in the system in question. The drives are connected to and managed by the RAID controller. > Finally, what would be the configuration of a good, > reliable Web Hosting environment that included all the > above servers and RAID, look like? Though not infinite, there are quite a few possible "configurations." I would say, though, that RAID is the easiest and cheapest way (regardless of whether it is IDE or SCSI) to provide a level of redundancy in a hosting environment. It doesn't address interruptions in Internet connectivity, power irregularities, or a thousand other problems that can occur, but it protects a computer from the most common failure that I've witnessed, a bad hard drive. After all, your drives are the only mechanical components in a modern computer. Your data flies around at 7,200 to 15,000 revolutions per minute on ball bearings. Hard drives constitute, without a doubt, the most antiquated technology in any hosting environment. If nothing else, it just makes me feel better to know that they have to fail two times over before I start losing data and time. :) Benjamin S. Rogers http://www.c4.net/ v.508.240.0051 f.508.240.0057 __ This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
