On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 8:49 PM, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 7/5/2011 1:30 PM, Rudi Ahlers wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 8:20 PM, Les Mikesell<lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> How much can that matter? Reads are going to be cached in main RAM
>> anyway - which is pretty cheap these days.
>>
>
>> Yes, but I suppose it all depends on the needs of the server in question :)But it doesn't matter if you lose the read cache in RAM - and the OS is
>
> In our case, with web servers, reads (i.e. opening websites,
> downloading content) far outweighs writes (which are basically logs,
> file uploads, and sessions being written to disk.
>
> In case of forums (we have many clients with forums) reads& writes
> are sometimes equal, but even then reads are still more common in our
> case than writes.
going to keep a copy there as long as it can anyway. The point of SSD
caching of journals/writes is that it survives a reboot. If you have a
lot more SSD than spare RAM it might save a few seeks as a side effect
but why not just add RAM if that matters?
--
It's not always easy, or even possible to add more RAM, especially since the storage servers weren't fitted with motherboards that can take more than say 8 or 16GB RAM .
--
Kind Regards
Rudi Ahlers
SoftDux
Website: http://www.SoftDux.com
Technical Blog: http://Blog.SoftDux.com
Office: 087 805 9573
Cell: 082 554 7532
_______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
