On 6-Dec-06, at 5:26 PM, Ron wrote:
At 06:40 PM 12/6/2006, Brian Wipf wrote:
I appreciate your suggestions, Ron. And that helps answer my question
on processor selection for our next box; I wasn't sure if the lower
MHz speed of the Kentsfield compared to the Woodcrest but with double
the cores would be better for us overall or not.
Please do not misunderstand me. I am not endorsing the use of
Kentsfield.
I am recommending =evaluating= Kentsfield.
I am also recommending the evaluation of 2C 4S AMD solutions.
All this stuff is so leading edge that it is far from clear what
the RW performance of DBMS based on these components will be
without extensive testing of =your= app under =your= workload.
I want the best performance for the dollar, so I can't rule anything
out. Right now I'm leaning towards Kentsfield, but I will do some
more research before I make a decision. We probably won't wait much
past January though.
One thing that is clear from what you've posted thus far is that
you are going to needmore HDs if you want to have any chance of
fully utilizing your Areca HW.
Do you know off hand where I might find a chassis that can fit 24[+]
drives? The last chassis we ordered was through Supermicro, and the
largest they carry fits 16 drives.
Hoping I'm being helpful
I appreciate any help I can get.
Brian Wipf
<brian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
