On Mon, 26 May 2003 15:07:42 EDT, Dean Anderson said: > I notice that you can get 250Gig disks now for under $400. 2 Disks make 1 > 500Meg volume. Apply a raid controller with 2 more disks, and we are > talking about $2000 in disks. ($2000 is kind of inflated really, but some > ISPs like Av8 consider mail to be important). I'm sorry, but our policy doesn't bet the e-mail requirements of a $400M/year organization on a single low-bidder RAID set. Remember that at the same time as we're putting 750K messages/day INTO the store, it's also being pounded by some 2M+ POP checks per day. There's response time issues, IO/sec limits - you end up wanting more spindles. You might want to look at the rebuild time for a RAID set using those 250G drives - you lose one drive, you're rebuilding to a hot spare for a LONG time. And if you lose another drive in the meantime, you're screwed. You want to split your mailstore across multiple raid boxes so even if the unthinkable happens, you only lose PART of the mailstore. Trust me - we've been doing this for a number of years, and there's *reasons* why the current mailstore is split across 7 shelves of Sun D1000 disk when we could stick it all on a single set of 3 250G drives. Did I mention that you had to be able to back this all up? And on a prompt regular basis? Twice the disk space because half of it is spam means twice the backup capacity needed and twice the time to take a backup.... And I don't care if it only costs me $5,000 to buy all the resources I need to store the spam - I'd like to know under what moral system it's OK to rationalize spamming "just because I think it doesn't cost as much to support as the actual recipient does". That's pretty much the same thing as saying that it's OK for your dog to urinate on my lawn and kill the grass because that just means it will cost me $40 in grass seed rather than than the $20 I was expecting to pay....
Attachment:
pgp00233.pgp
Description: PGP signature