On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 21:43:16 -0700 (PDT), email builder wrote > Thanks. We were thinking about a NFS server, but SA concerns seemed > more important. If both can coexist peacefully, this may be the > exact same solution that we use.
It seems like it'd be a good match. NFS is highly I/O intensive, but doesn't use the CPU much. SA is highly CPU intensive, but does relatively little I/O. Just make sure you have enough memory; you don't want SA's hunger for RAM to starve the machine for disk cache space, and you sure as heck don't want any swapping.
