Tim Cutts wrote:
On 30 Mar 2004, at 09:05, Tim Cutts wrote:
SATA RAID devices aren't that bad, you know, and they are a lot
cheaper than equivalent amounts of SCSI storage. We've used NexSan
ATABoy devices, which are relatively cheap, and get you a lot of
storage in very little space (10GB in
On 30 Mar 2004, at 09:05, Tim Cutts wrote:
SATA RAID devices aren't that bad, you know, and they are a lot
cheaper than equivalent amounts of SCSI storage. We've used NexSan
ATABoy devices, which are relatively cheap, and get you a lot of
storage in very little space (10GB in a 3U box).
I did
ot;Donny Simonton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "'Chad Attermann'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2004 1:05 AM
Subject: Re: Best Performing Hardware/OS/MySQL?
>
> On 29 Mar 2004, at 23:55, Donny Simonton wrote:
>
> &
On 29 Mar 2004, at 23:55, Donny Simonton wrote:
SCSI, 15,000 RPM drives and a decent amount of memory 2-16 gigs. Dual
procs
definitely do help; we have tried it with dual procs with
hyperthreading and
without and with hyperthreading seems to be much faster.
Besides that, you can run it on any
We like it on Netware 6.5, with memory equal to 10 times the size of
your largest DB. ie; DB=100mb RAM=1gb. Fastest proc you can afford.
>>> "Chad Attermann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 3/29/04 1:56:05 PM >>>
Hello All,
I have been a MySQL user for some time and have always run MySQL on
older generati
SCSI, 15,000 RPM drives and a decent amount of memory 2-16 gigs. Dual procs
definitely do help; we have tried it with dual procs with hyperthreading and
without and with hyperthreading seems to be much faster.
Besides that, you can run it on any OS; we use Fedora, with Linux 2.6.x.
But that's o
