Eli,
Pardon me for not responding sooner. You threw me a curve.
What you ask me about, I have never even thought of.
When I purchased, I chose to add a server to my LAN. Simple as that.
History:
My server came to me used with acceptable credentials, w/loaded OS,
ready to 'play' with.
It came to
My feeling is I hate servers (just talking about the hardware) unless
I really need one. For most home use I don't really see why you'd
need one.
The main reason I dislike them is they are very loud. But then there is:
RAID arrays that they come with really aren't so useful. Are you
really
09, 2010 11:31 PM
To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com
Subject: Re: [H] Pending conversion?
Onboard 'raid' is like using 'mspaint' for professional photo editing.
Just
because it's there doesn't mean you should use it. Most onboard raid is
utter
garbage and can end up doing more harm than good. I
Depends on the point of the raid controller. I'm not saying its as
good as a real controller but if he only needs as much performance as
his old setup and wants the extra reliability then onboard mirrored
raid is good enough and sould be faster then what he has now.
Just because you can spend a
Testing...
Seems Thunderbird has taken to posting/responding here using my other
account when I hit reply? Was wondering why it seemed like I was not
involved in the conversation!
Now to figure out why the Delivered-To: is not the account I reply from...
I have a very nice, perhaps, antique, W2K server. It trucks on just
fine ATM. Certainly I can not afford to replace it with current new
hardware. Yes, I can just retire/junk it! Might lower my yearly KVM
bill even. I just do not see why ATM...
LOL! (Stop laughing Bryan!) MS Updates have
Comments inline:
On Mon, Aug 09, 2010 at 02:56:09PM -0400, DSinc wrote:
I have a very nice, perhaps, antique, W2K server. It trucks on just
fine ATM. Certainly I can not afford to replace it with current new
hardware. Yes, I can just retire/junk it! Might lower my yearly KVM
bill even.
Yeah, conclusion: wait until it's time (when you can afford) to replace the box
entirely :)
On Mon, Aug 09, 2010 at 04:46:15PM -0700, FORC5 wrote:
cheaper/better to update the MB IMO
fp
At 12:17 PM 8/9/2010, Bryan Seitz Poked the stick with:
Hmm... Sata raid isnt a bad choice as long as
Bryan,
I will print and parse your suggestions. Afraid I may be even more behind.
The best I can offer are PCI-66 slots on an old Intel STL2 m/b (think
this is ServerWerz chipset/design). Know this may be way past its'
prime, but this beast just will not die.
Yes, I may be trying to beat a
sometimes I think blown caps were a blessing in disguise forcing updating :-[
I know my bad
fp
At 07:26 PM 8/9/2010, DSinc Poked the stick with:
Bryan,
I will print and parse your suggestions. Afraid I may be even more behind.
The best I can offer are PCI-66 slots on an old Intel STL2 m/b (think
FORC5,
On this I can agree. Probably why it takes me 10 minutes to dig through
a support site for a m/b.
I still recall most of the detailed shares here about the capacitor issue.
Sadly, it continues to pop up in 'older' machines. I still watch for
puffed caps
Don't know whose caps were
I don't understand why you want a raid controller. Are you really
doing anything that is disk i/o bound? or is it to keep from losing
data? Would seem like almost any modern m/b with low end CPU would be
faster and you can just use the built in raid to do a mirrored raid.
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010
Onboard 'raid' is like using 'mspaint' for professional photo editing. Just
because it's there
doesn't mean you should use it. Most onboard raid is utter garbage and can end
up doing more
harm than good. I would choose software raid over cheap onboard garbage any
day. In fact, software
13 matches
Mail list logo
