Subject: Re: NetBSD Foundation's new machines
To: Lars Nordlund <email@example.com>
From: David Maxwell <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 07/22/2005 15:07:33
> On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 11:46:48 -0500
> email@example.com wrote:
> > > Anonymous CVS servers (two machines)
> > > 2 CPU [2 cpu Opteron 244 (1.8GHz)]
> > > 8 GB Memory (8 x 1GB PC3200 DDR 400MHz ECC memory)
> > > 150 GB Disk (4 SATA 36.7GB 10K RPM drives)
> > >
> > > Build Servers (three machines)
> > > 4 CPU [2 cpu (dual core) Opteron 265 (1.8GHz)]
> > > 4 GB Memory (4 x 1GB PC3200 DDR 400MHz ECC memory)
> > > 210 GB Disk (3 SATA 74GB 10K RPM 8MB Raptor drives)
> > Just out of curiosity, why were such small hard drives purchased? Or
> > were these older ones that were already laying around? I was just
> > wondering, because the going price for 200 GB SATA drives is only about
> > $100. Anything smaller is considerably more expensive per GB.
> The disks are 10K RPM, not 7200 or 5400 RPM as the drives you are
> suggesting. I suppose speed is a more important factor than disk size
> in those machines.
SCSI interfaces are a more important factor by far. They still handle
multiple concurrent requests far better than IDE or SATA drives.
SATA is starting to add support for queued requests, but from what I
heard last, it's not well supported yet, and not supported at all in
many models of drives.