Re: Areca 1260 Performance

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(at)clickspace(dot)com>