Jacob S. wrote:
help you too much there. I can tell you that your cpu won't be the bottleneck for 40 samba users, though. You need to make sure you're using Raid 0 or 5.
Hm, we´ve a 3ware IDE RAID controller running in our mail server with two HDs in RAID-1, and the disks seem pretty fast. New servers should get 3ware S-ATAs in RAID 3 or 5. There´s no point in using SCSI on them, or at least I don´t get it.
The only reason I think you would need to worry about file transfers is if your users all editing 7GB videos all day. But even then, you would need Gigabit ethernet and more raid arrays before I would expect you to have cpu problems (and I would expect you to be asking about Appletalk, not Samba :-).
Ja :) Well, my idea was that dual boards are designed to give better overall throughput than single boards, and the boards should have at least one 64bit PCI slot each for the 3wares. There are not so many boards out there with such slots ... I think I should find out how much cost 2 CPUs vs. 1 CPU would add --- if the difference is not too much, the dual board would be the better choice.
Part of the problem is that I cannot exactly figure upcoming demands. The servers will probably be in service for a very long time and eventually be extended rather than being replaced. Thus I tend to strategically oversize the base hardware a bit because upgrading from two or three year old, or even older, hardware doesn´t make much sense MOTT. Disks can be replaced and added easily, but upgrading CPUs or memory can become more or less impossible within a few years.
GH -- for i in "*.txt"; do mail -s $i hwilmer < $i; done su: $i: ambiguous redirect