On Wed, 2005-04-06 at 14:40 -0400, Alex Turner wrote:
> I think his point was that 9 * 4 != 2400
Oh.. heh.. I didn't even notice that.
Can I pretend I did it in my head using HEX math and that it wasn't a
mistake?
> On Apr 6, 2005 2:23 PM, Rod Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2005-0
I think his point was that 9 * 4 != 2400
Alex Turner
netEconomist
On Apr 6, 2005 2:23 PM, Rod Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-04-06 at 19:42 +0200, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 06, 2005 at 01:18:29PM -0400, Rod Taylor wrote:
> > > Yeah, I think that can be done pro
On Wed, 2005-04-06 at 19:42 +0200, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 06, 2005 at 01:18:29PM -0400, Rod Taylor wrote:
> > Yeah, I think that can be done provided there is more than one worker.
> > My limit seems to be about 1000 transactions per second each with a
> > single insert for a sin
On Wed, Apr 06, 2005 at 01:18:29PM -0400, Rod Taylor wrote:
> Yeah, I think that can be done provided there is more than one worker.
> My limit seems to be about 1000 transactions per second each with a
> single insert for a single process (round trip time down the Fibre
> Channel is large) but run
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As we don't plan to have more than 5 connections (I.E process), we
think SATA drives would fit our requirements. Could this be an issue
for an after crash recovery ?
If you can disable the write ATA write cache, then you have safety.
Unfortunately many cards under Linu
